BOOKS/A. P. Sinnett - The Early...
126
THE EARLY DAYS ' OF THEOSOPHY IN EUROPE By A. P. SINNETT. TOG'“o‘r\ %Q/Y». I3’) \9J"+C‘ SCI“-1, |q9-\ LONDON THEOSOPHICAL PUBLJSHING HOUSE LTD. 9, s1". MARTIN’S STREET, w.c. 2 1922 ~¢ ‘ .. '3' ‘ ’.-- . ;' - |-S'L\rnI:3"z:I-" -QM‘, H’'";. €I.u'.;' °*'\ -\ ! i.:\§.Z'i3 . '!':‘ | ' ~.. . - -. G-->"r'LI.lJ''’'v\$’L3. kl v -
Transcript of BOOKS/A. P. Sinnett - The Early...
THE EARLY DAYS'
OF
THEOSOPHY IN EUROPE
By
A. P. SINNETT.
TOG'“o‘r\%Q/Y». I3’) \9J"+C‘
SCI“-1, |q9-\
LONDON
THEOSOPHICAL PUBLJSHING HOUSE LTD.
9, s1". MARTIN’S STREET, w.c. 2
1922
~¢‘ .. '3' ‘ ’.-- . ;' -
|-S'L\rnI:3"z:I-" -QM‘, H’'";. €I.u'.;' °*'\ -\ !i.:\§.Z'i3
. '!':‘ |' ~.. . - -.
G-->"r'LI.lJ''’'v\$’L3.kl
v
-
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
'l
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
NOTEMr. Sinnett’s literary Executor in arranging for
the publication of this volume is prompted to add a
few words of explanation.There is naturally some diffidence experienced in
placing before the public a posthumous MSS ofpersonal reminiscences dealing in various instanceswith people still living.
It would, however, be impossible to use theeditorial blue pencil without destroying the historicalvalue of the MSS.
Mr. Sinnett’s position and associations with theTheosophical Society together with his standing asan author in the Theosophical movement alike demandthat his last writing should be published, and it is leftto each reader to form his own judgment as to thevalue of the book in the light of his own study of thequestions involved.
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
THE EARLY DAYS- OF
THEOSOPHY IN EUROPEBy A. P. SINNETT
the Theosophical Society if it concerned
itself merely with events taking shape on
the physical plane of life. From the first such events
have been the result of activities on a higher plane;of steps taken by the unseen Powers presiding over
human evolution, whose existence was unknown in the
outer world when their great undertaking—theTheosophical Movement—was originally set on foot.To those known in the outer world as the Foundersof the Theosophical Society—Madame Blavatsky andColonel Olcott—the existence of these higher powers,“ The Brothers ”
as they were called at first, was moreor less imperfectly comprehended. That some purpose the Brothers had in view was to be subserved bysteps the “ founders ” felt impelled to take in the year1875 was dimly realised. And in the first volume ofColonel Olcott’s “ Old Diary Leaves ” it is possibleto trace the growth of this belief and equally possibleto see how remote from any true conception of that
CHAPTER I
N O record could truly be called a History of
2
7
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
\ purpose were the ideas which animated the Founders
when they held the meeting, since regarded as
the inauguration of the Theosophical Society, in
November, 1875. On the outer plane the idea of
establishing a Society—its name was agreed on later—
was suggested by Colonel Olcott during an informal
gathering of persons who had become interested in
Madame Blavatsky, at her rooms in New York, in
September, 1875, the ostensible motive of the gather
ing being interest in a lecture to be given by a certain
Mr. Felt on Egyptian antiquities and the magicalscience of the Egyptian priests, but we soon lose
sight of Mr. Felt as the formation of the Society
proceeded.The day after this gathering a more formal meeting
was held, and those present resolved to form a Societyfor “the study and elucidation of Occultism, the
Cabala, etc.” At an adjourned meeting on Septemberthe 18th “ it was decided that the name of the Societyshould be ‘ The Theosophical Society.’ ”
Early in the last century the drift of cultivatedopinion in the western world had been definitely inthe direction of pure materialism. The progress ofscience had encouraged the belief that all consciousness was the result of natural laws working through'organised matter, satirised at the time in some versesdictated by a more spiritual faith :
“ I believe in cornand rice; not in virtue or in vice.” But playfulcriticisms of that order had very little effect. TheMasters saw the danger of the predominant tendency,and it was decided that an attempt should be made toascertain whether the World was ripe for a partialrevelation of the natural laws governing humanevolution. This attempt took the shape of the
Theosophical movement. While the Theosophicalmovement was still in the experimental stage the
8
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
teachings, given as an experiment, were not syste
matically designed. It was enough to indicate some
broad truths—the existence of the Masters, the growth
of the Ego under the law of Reincarnation, itself
subject to Karma, and the stupendous magnitude of
a planetary scheme to which we of this Earth belong.
After the publication of “ Isis Unveiled ” Madame
Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott left New York on their
way to India. They had already become acquainted
by correspondence with the Swami Dyanand Saras
vati, a Hindoo reformer at the head of an organizationcalled the Arya Samaj, and became possessed with a
belief, eventually abandoned, that the TheosophicalSociety would derive advantage by being connected
with that organization, and it was described for a
time as “ The Theosophical Society of the 'AryaSamaj,” and the name was, for a short period adopted
by a branch established in London. The formationof the first European branch of the Society was dueto the influence and exertions of Mr. Charles CarltonMassey, who, in the same way that Colonel Olcott isdescribed as the Founder of the Society in New York,was certainly the Founder of the Society in GreatBritain. He was the son of W. N. Massey, the firstFinance Minister of India and himself a barrister,though private means enabled him to dispense withthe active practice of that profession. He was devotedto earnest philosophical study, and translated BaronCarl Duprel’s book (“ The Philosophy of Mysticism”). I made his acquaintance during my firstholiday visit home from India in I88'r. and enjoyedhis friendship till his death. He had visited Americain 1875, drawn thither by interest in certain remarkable spiritualistic phenomena then attracting publicattention. At the “Eddy Homestead,” the scene ofthese manifestations, he seems to have made acquaint
--.
9
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
ance with Colonel Olcott and Madame Blavatsky.He was present at the inaugural meeting of the
Theosophical Society in New York and on his returnto London established in co-operation with friendsthe branch above referred to. In his “ Old DiaryLeaves ” Colonel Olcott tells us that according to the
first circular issued in ]une, 1878, it was called “ TheBritish Theosophical Society of the Arya Samaj ofAryavart.” Its objects were then defined as follows :
1. The British Theosophical Society is foundedfor the purpose of discovering the nature and
powers of the human soul and spirit by investigation and experiment.
2. The object of the Society is to increase the
amount of human health, goodness, knowledge,wisdom and happiness.
3. The fellows pledge themselves to endeavour to
the best of their powers, to live a life of tem
perance, purity and brotherly love. Theybelieve in a great First Intelligent Cause, andin the Divine Sonship of the spirit of man, andhence in the immortality of that spirit and inthe universal brotherhood of the human race.
4. The Society is in connexion and sympathywith the Arya Samaj of Aryavart, one object ofwhich Society is to elevate, by a true spiritualeducation, mankind out of degenerate, idolatrous and impure forms of worship, whereverprevalent.’
The only interest attaching to this earliest attemptto define the purposes of the Theosophical movementresides in the use of the word “ Brotherhood.” Mr.Massey was then the first to make use of that expression. Colonel Olcott adopted it from him.
* Vide OLD DIARY Liuwirs, vol. i. p.399.
IO
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
The circular embodying the British statement of
objects was no doubt in Colonel Olcott’s hands whenhe wrote; but the elaborate name for the Society,
connecting it with the Eastern organization seems to
have been forgotten almost as soon as framed. I havein my possession the original Minute Book of the
British Society and this interesting volume gives usthe actual facts connected with the very earliest
beginning of Theosophy in Europe, due, as I havesaid above to the efforts of Mr. C. C. Massey.
The first entry in the Minute Book shows that a
meeting was held at 38, Great Russell Street, London,on the 27th of ]une, 1878, when those present, (allthe names being recorded) were Mr. ]. Storer Cobb,
(already with some of the others named—a memberof the New York Society), Mr. C. C. Massey, Dr.C. Carter Blake, Dr. George Wyld, Dr. H. ]. Billingand Miss E. Kislingbury. Mr. Cobb presided.
The first resolution passed declared :. “That in theopinion of the English Fellows of the TheosophicalSociety of New York present at this meeting, it isdesirable to form a Society in England in connexionand sympathy with that body.” Mr. C. C. Masseywas then, by ballot, elected President of the newBranch Society and Miss Kislingbury was chosen asits Secretary.
The meetings of the new Society were not heldfrequently. The next, after the inaugural meetingwas held on the 1st of October, and then anothermonth elapsed before there was a third. At thattime no one seemed to know what to do. Many namesare added to the list of members. A suggestion ismade that books should be selected and discussed,also that mesmeric experiments should be tried, butthis idea does not seem to have been followed up.As we can see now the formation of the Societies in
_II
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
New York and London, regarded from a higherpoint of view, merely provided a framework to beanimated later on.. Resignations of early memberssoon began to appear on the minutes. Mr. Billing,a well-known spiritualist medium of the period goesinto trance at one meeting, and gives “ information ”—not more definitely recorded. Then a sudden stirof excitement ensued when Madame Blavatsky andColonel Olcott passed through London on their wayto India and were present at a meeting of the BritishSociety on the 5th of ]anuary, 1879. The proceedings, on that occasion, however, were of a formalcharacter relating to Diplomas, initiation fees, and“obligations ” and only enlivened by an assurancefrom Madame Blavatsky that “the Society mightexpect the advent of competent instructors from Indiawith confidence.”
The Colonel and Madame Blavatsky seem to havebeen disillusioned about the Arya Samaj even beforeleaving New York, and “in resuming the Society’sautonomy”—as Colonel Olcott expresses himselfit seemed desirable to draw up a new declaration ofprinciples. In this we get for the first time a foreshadowing of the well-known “
objects ” of theSociety. As first stated they were :—
1. The study of occult science.2. The formation of a nucleus of universal brother
hood.
3. The revival of Oriental literature and philosophy.At various periods in the progress of the Societythe “
objects ”were rearranged and revised until they
assumed the shape, familiar to all later members, withthe Brotherhood idea coming first as follows :
r. To form a nucleus of the universal Brotherhood of Humanity without distinction of race,creed, sex, caste, or colour.
I2
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
2. To encourage the study of Comparative Religions, Philosophy and Science.
3. To investigate the unexplained laws of Natureand the Powers latent in Man.
I think the motive for the record of the objects inthis way may be traced to an anxiety on the part ofMadame Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott, while theydominated the early growth of the Society in India,to attract as many members as possible without allowing belief in the existence of the Masters to become
a necessary qualification for membership. In realitythe movement had no meaning if it did not serve to
lift, in some measure, the curtain that had previouslyveiled the actual Divine Hierarchy from the consciousness of the outer world. But Brotherhood wasa simple idea within the comprehension of the outerworld and as stated in the revised declaration ofobjects was calculated to attract Indian sympathies—and Indian rupees! Looking back to the history ofthe Society for the three or four years following the
arrival of Colonel Olcott and Madame Blavatsky in
India in the year 1879 we must be careful to avoidthe mistake of supposing that their efforts to estab
lish the Society on a firm financial basis had any selfregarding motive. As the story proceeds it will be
seen that the “ Founders ” made many mistakes,which sometimes nearly wrecked their own work, but
they were both utterly free from any personal avaricein this matter. Colonel Olcott had thrown up occu-
pations in America which had been fairly lucrative inorder to devote his life to the task of promoting an
enterprise which he but dimly understood, but knewto be designed by the Masters whose claim to hisreverent attachment he had learned fully to appreciate. He was not called upon to interpret their teach
ings. At the period I am now dealing with he had
Is
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
scarcely glimpsed them. But he felt that he had tomake the Theosophical Society a big solid fact in the
world—especially in India, to which country he wasdrawn by sympathies which much later knowledge‘rnables some of us to understand. In former lives—though in 1879 we none of us knew anything aboutformer lives—he had been closely connected withIndia, and at important periods of its history had
played important parts. In this life he went out withMadame Blavatsky to India vaguely feeling that forthem it was a holy land, and his practical businesslike aptitude guided his efforts when there, towardsmaking the Society a business-like success. He was
indefatigable in organising new branches and in col
lecting the “ initiation fees ” without which the workcould not go on. It is undeniable that he lived inIndia on the Society’s funds, but it is equally truethat his personal expenditure was always kept withinthe lowest possible limits, his motives of action pureand unselfish. And as far as Madame Blavatsky wasconcerned, when my wife and I first knew her in 1879,
she was hard at work earning her living by writingfor Russian periodicals.
This explanation will show how it came to passthat “ Brotherhood,” in later years, was regarded as
the foremost idea animating the Society,—the recognition of universal brotherhood the one condition ofmembership. Adopted in India to attract natives ofthat country apt to be sore about the prestige of the
European residents, it assumed a new meaning whentransplanted to Europe. People whose politicalsympathies took the colouring of ultra-democracy andsocialism imagined that the Society was mainly inspired with sympathies of that order. The preservation of the word “ nucleus ” in the formulationadopted ought to have averted the mistake, and as9
I4
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
the teaching of the Masters gradually filtered throughto the outer world it should have been seen that the
“nucleus” of a universal brotherhood consists of
the advanced members of the human family in a
position to understand the spiritual unity manifest onthe Buddhic plane. In the long process of ages thatcomprehension should be “ universal ”
throughout the
human family but we are far as yet from havingreached that sublime condition.
Some time ago, in ]uly, 1917, I wrote in the“Vahan,” the magazine published by the BritishNational branch of the Society, a short article on thissubject which will bear reproduction now. Afterexplaining how the word first came to be used, Iwent on :.>——
From time to time we may usefully review thegradually improving conceptions we have beenenabled to form concerning the grand purposesunderlying the Theosophical Movement. The phrasesin which these were ultimately crystallised do not(though this matters little) reflect the ideas present tothe minds of those who, in 1875, did actually, in acertain sense, “ found ” the Society. At that time itwas the result of interest excited among a smallgroup of persons frequenting Madame Blavatsky’srooms in New York, by the exhibition of her wonderful occult powers. As Colonel Olcott explains in his“ Diary Leaves ” a lecture was given in September,1875, at Madame Blavatsky’s rooms by a certainMr. Felt, of whom we lose sight afterwards, on the
Adept Magic of Egyptian priests. Colonel Olcottthen suggested the formation of a Society to studythis subject. That was done, and though the title“ Theosophical” was adopted (doubtless underoccult guidance) Colonel Olcott at one time proposedto call it a “ Miracle Club.”
The word “ Brotherhood ” does not creep into itsrecords till some years later. It was first used byMr. C. C. Massey and his friends in London when
15
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
they formed a British branch of the New YorkSociety. They described its purpose as being,
“ todiscover the nature and powers of the human soul,”and they went on to declare that they believed in “ a
great intelligent First Cause and in the divine son
ship of the spirit of Man, and hence in the immortality of that spirit and in the universal Brotherhoodof the human race'” Colonel Olcott took this hintand developed the idea in a new statement of subjectsas follows: “
1. The study of Occult Science.2. The formation of a nucleus of universal brotherhood. 3. The revival of oriental literature.” Theword “brotherhood” was afterwards shifted intothe first place, but it was always accompanied by thequalifying term “ Nucleus.” It was not used andshould never be used by Theosophists with the
significance attached to it by those concerned withmundane politics or social reconstruction on thephysical plane. The word in its theosophical meaning refers to the Unity of Divine consciousness onlofty planes of Nature, and to the nucleus for thereflection of that Unity on the physical plane thatmay be formed by theosophical students who appreciate the teaching aright.
The gross democratic meaning attached to theterm Brotherhood is an insult to Theosophicalteaching. The consciousness which expands intoperfect humanity is, no doubt, in a subtle metaphysical sense identical in its nature with the consciousness, not merely of the humbler classes in civilisedcountries, but with that also of the crocodile, thedog, the Australian savage, and the Master ofWisdom. But this does not mean that all manifestedconsciousness, in whatever vehicle we find it istherefore invested with equal claims on our respect.It is invested with equal claims on our sympathy andthat is how people who do not appreciate subtle distinctions drift into the misuse of the term brotherhood. If the sheep and the guinea pig are includedin the universal brotherhood, well and good, but wedo not ask the sheep or the guinea pig to contributetheir opinions to discussions of the suffrage question
16
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
for example. And that thought is a clue to thefallacy involved in regarding theosophical brotherhood as leading to political socialism. Theosophicalteaching concerning human evolution shows us thehuman family at present at very different stages ofdevelopment. It rescues us from the old fashionedblunder—arising from the ignorant delusion thateach new child is a new creation-—to the effect thatall have equal rights. According to a phrase classical in political writings, all are equally entitled to“ life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” but withvaried claims on the privilege of shaping laws providing for the fulfilment of that fundamental idea.- Thus to let the formula, in which the objects of theTheosophical Society are generally expressed, distortthe purpose of the movement to suit the purpose ofany mundane theory of social reform is a verygrievous blunder. From the beginning all qualifiedexponents of the theosophical movement have warnedus to keep clear of all political contamination‘. Thesociety includes persons of very varied politicalopinions but within the society their only duty is tostudy, and promote the study, of the super-physicalspiritual science gradually unfolded for our benefitand through us for the benefit of all mankind. Thefulfilment of that duty should be compatible withperfect harmony of feeling within the society, whereit is needless and undesirable to discuss varied beliefsas to how the physical welfare of the community maybe best promoted. We should not furnish unsympathetic critics of our real work with an excusefor pretending to regard us as a body of peopleentangled with questionable schemes for subversivechanges on the physical plane.
In reality the main object of the Society—thoughthis was not apparent to the so-called “ Founders ”
in the first instance,—was to set wide open the doors
leading to initiation on the Path, and thus to theearly attainment of the conditions towards whichevolution is tending,—doors which had previously
17 B
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
been shut against all but the few struggling with im
mense difficulty to make their way onwards. Butbefore elucidating that statement more fully let me
carry on the external narrative towards the period at
which my wife and myself began to co-operate.With the arrival of the Founders in India the real
development of the Society may be regarded as begin
ning. The situation at the time was briefly as follows :-
Madame Blavatsky is the central figure to be considered. She was the one person who knew of herown knowledge, that “ The Brothers,”-—-as she calledthem in those days—were Beings, human in aspect, offlesh and blood, for she had been for a time in com
pany with two of them in Tibet. She knew they haddazzling powers in dealing with the affairs of theworld. She herself had faculties of a super-physicalorder that kept her in touch with them wherever she
might be. She knew she had a mission to fulfil whicfihad for the moment assumed the shape of the Theosophical Society. She must have been conscious ofpossessing wonderful powers the exercise of which wasunder restriction, to which she submitted in devotionto the great Brother whom she regarded as her ownMaster, in a pre-eminent degree. She had written,“Isis Unveiled ” which, as a matter of fact, did notdo much towards the unveiling of Isis but was full ofextraordinarily suggestive hints, as also of evidencesshowing that when writing it she was quite ignoranteven of what we came later to regard as the A.B.C.of Theosophical teaching.
Colonel Olcott had not yet begun even to think ofthat. He simply knew that the Brothers existed;were sublimely entitled to his devotion ; that his immemediate business was to run the Theosophical Society,and to endure with all the stoicism he could muster,
18
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
the crushing tyranny of Madame Blavatsky-—-of whichmore anon.
The Theosophical Society was still in an embryoniccondition. It lingered, almost extinct, as an inactivenucleus in America. It had just been established inLondon and was in flickering existence under theinfluence chiefly of Mr. C. C. Massey and Mr.Henry ]. Hood, themselves so far having no definedconception of the task they had undertaken.Certainly nothing was doing on the physical plane atthat time to hint at the stupendous developments thatwere in reserve for the great experiment the Mastershad in hand, the preliminary conditions of which hadbeen provided by the course of events.
I must now deal———by the light of informationobtained at a much later period—with the superphysical conditions that prevailed at the period underreview, quite unsuspected by the persons who hadbeen guided to subserve them in the outer world.
As already explained, as far back as the year 1830“the Brothers ”—the Elder Brethren of humanityand those of still loftier spiritual attainment allmerged in the Divine Hierarchy and constituting thesublime organization that we have drifted into speaking of as “The White Lodge ”—held their momentous conference. They provided for the establishmentof Spiritualism, and for the later experiment that
eventually took the shape of the Theosophical Society.The difficulties attending the task go far to explain
what seems at the first glance as we look back thetedious roundabout methods employed. Agents had
to be found on the physical plane, and the qualifications needed were not easily found in combination.
The first person wanted had to serve as a link between
the White Lodge and the world at large, one able to
speak of the Brothers from personal knowledge and
I9
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
yet attached to the ordinary world. He or she had tobe endowed with the superior senses which wouldenable him or her to remain in conscious touch withthe Brothers even while living out in the ordinaryworld, and beyond this to be trustworthy as regardsthe one supreme attribute of loyalty to the Master he
or she might specially belong to. Other attributeswere extremely desirable, but the three just enumerated were essential. And protracted search all overthe world failed to provide a better “link ” than—Madame Blavatsky!
As deplorable results ensued later on from manycharacteristics she displayed, innumerable intelligentmembers of the Society, as it grew, asked with indignation—why did the Masters select such an ill qualifiedAgent? The answer simply is :—They could not finda better I As the story proceeds it will be seen that theembarrassment they had to face through MadameBlavatsky’s indiscretions——to use a mild term—wouldoften have been ludicrous if they had not also beenso grievous in their consequences. But Masters of theWhite Lodge are patient and persevering. TheSociety lived through the dangerous ailments of thecradle period, has hardly yet as I write in 1918escaped completely from the diseases of childhood, buthas long since developed a constitution that robs themof danger to life, and enables the Society to defy themachinations of invisible foes. But I must now lookback at our early troubles, as they were entangled withthe important chapter in the Society’s history whichbegins with the year 1879.
20
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
CHAPTER II
Colonel Olcott arrived in Bombay At thattime I was, and had been for about eight years,
Editor of the “Pioneer,” the leading Anglo-Indiandaily newspaper. Friends in London had told me
about Madame Blavatsky’s book “ Isis Unveiled,"how it opened up new vistas of thought beyond thosesuggested by spiritualism, of which my wife and Ihad seen a good deal before coming out to India. Itseemed to revive old beliefs concerning Magic, longregarded in the western world as mere superstition.At all events the authoress of that book was a remarkable person, sufficiently so for public notice, and'Iwrote a note in the “Pioneer ”
apropos to her arrivalin India suggesting that she might be in search of newvarieties of mediumship among the people of thatcountry. This prompted Colonel Olcott to write to
me, though at the time, little foreseeing all that wasdestined to grow out of the correspondence, I did notkeep the letter in question. The Editor of a dailypaper is naturally deluged with correspondence andcannot always tell what is worth preservation.
But intuition, as I see now, came to the rescue,intuition not on my own part, but on that of my wife.I well remember how one evening during our ha'wa
khana (the Hindustani phrase, “eating the air”—i.e.,driving in the cool (P) of the evening) we talked ofthe new comers, as probably connected with the subject of spiritualism in which we had been interestedbefore leaving England. Then my wife suggested as
EARLYin the year 1879 Madame Blavatsky and
21
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
a daring experiment that we should invite them to staywith us when they came up country, as no doubt theywould do later on. We both laughed over the notion,feeling that there was an element of risk in theadventure as the guests we proposed for ourselveswere perfect strangers, but decided to run the risk. SoI duly sent the invitation, and (in view of theinfluences that were playing upon us at that time) ofcourse it was eagerly accepted. Long afterwardsMadame Blavatsky told me how emphatic her“ Master ” had been in desiring that this should be
done.I feel impelled as I write now (I9r8)——-ten years after
my wife passed on from this plane of existence, to a
condition of great exaltation in the White Lodge—anexpression which includes many below the “ Master ”
rank, as well as many more high above it—to give myreaders something like a fair comprehension of thepart she played in our joint work. Throughout this,of course, external activities, writing and lecturing, fellto my share, but I cannot exaggerate the extent towhich her steadfast loyalty to the task we had in handcontributed to whatever success we achieved. Without possessing psychic faculties, in the ordinary senseof the term, her intuitions were always to be trusted,and her practical influence as hostess while our housein London, after our final return from India, was thecentre of theosophical expansion in this country, hadan all-important effect in attracting sympathy.Amongst those who became our intimate friends herinfluence was keenly appreciated, and looking back onthe exciting years beginning in 1883, and ultimatelyrendered trying by Madame Blavatsky’s presence inLondon, I realise how I myself was more than helpedto persevere with our work by her unvarying constancy to the lofty purpose. It will be impossible to
22
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
reiterate this idea at every step in the narrative I haveto carry on, but throughout it the spiritual energybehind my public activities was due in very greatmeasure to the stimulating companionship it was mygood fortune to enjoy. We had some terrible trials to
bear in the progress of time. The faintest comprehension of the way in which the great powers of Evil were
in arms from the beginning against all persons prominent in the theosophical movement, will suggest the
simple truth that very heavy attacks were levelledagainst ourselves. During the worst sufferings theyoccasioned, my wife’s constancy never faltered, and
though she is now on levels of existence from which allsuch troubles may be regarded with composure, or a
smile, they were ordeals in the severest sense of the
term at the time. Through these she has passed nowas I say to very beautiful destinies. Of them I knowa good deal both from herself and from others, for Iam in touch with that higher world to which she
belongs, but to go into further detail would at allevents be premature for the moment. Apropos to the
first instance in which her intuition prompted us to
do the right thing in reference to Madame Blavatsky,I have gone far ahead of the actual stage I havereached in my story; but as it proceeds the reader willall the better be able to appreciate the extent to whichmy wife participated in all our joint doings during the
early days of the Theosophical movement.'
The plans Colonel Olcott and Madame Blavatskyhad already made provided for a long tour in the southof India and Ceylon, and it was not till nearly the endof the year, that she and Colonel Olcott actuallygcameto us at Allahabad.
I vividly remember the circumstances around theirarrival. They came by a train reaching Allahabad at
a very early hour in the morning. I went to the station
as
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
\
I
to meet them and brought them back. It was still so
early that our Chota hazri or first breakfast was set outin the verandah though my wife had not yet emergedfrom her room. Madame Blavatsky sat down withme at the table and asked me if we had been trying anyexperiments in spiritualism. I told her that we haddone so sometimes but without any results, “ not even
so much as a rap,”i-“ Oh,” she said, “ raps are the
easiest things to get,” and thereupon put her handupon the table. At once raps of the genuine spiritualistic order were heard all about it
‘. My wife almost
immediately appeared and received the visitors cordially. Our first impression of Madame Blavatskywas certainly pleasant and I find in my wife’s Diaryfor that day—the 4th of December, 1879—the following entry concerning Madame Blavatsky. “ A mostoriginal old lady who promises great amusement.”But though_the day passed pleasantly and nothingoccurred to disturb first impressions, we did get some
thing like a shock a day or two later. We were sittinground the fire in the evening—for about Christmastime at Allahabad one makes a practice of wanting afire to look at—and Colonel Olcott had been talking ofsome among Madame Blavatsky’s “ jadoo ” or magicperformances in New York. It came to be suggestedthat she should create something for us then andthere, and I proposed a cigar holder as the object to
be produced. Madame Blavatsky went through some
preliminaries, rubbing Colonel Olcott’s meerschaumpipe in her hands, and then—simply put her handinto her pocket and produced a cigar holder. Theperformance as an exhibition of magic was so absurd,so grotesquely destitute of any evidential value, that it
was difficult to know what to say. I don’t remember
how we got through the rest of the evening, but I doremember how, when my wife and I were at last alone
. 24
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
together, we looked at one another! No words were
needed. Were we really in the hands of a clumsyimpostor? That was the wonder in both our mindsas we began to talk. Of course there were the raps,which Madame Blavatsky had produced for us in allsorts of ways; they were certainly evidences of some
thing more than even mere mediumship. They wereobviously under her control in a way that is never the
case with mediumship, so we resolved to be patientand not jump to any premature conclusions.
As time went on the disagreeable impression fadedaway and we became cordially attached to “the oliiLady ” as we called her, that name in turn becomingabbreviated till she was generally known in our intimate circle as “the O.L.” The visit originally de
signed for a few days’ duration was expanded into onelasting about four weeks. The O.L. was a brighttalker at small dinner parties at our house and else
where; and we gradually heard from her a good dealabout “the Brothers ” and the Theosophical Societywhich at last she induced us to join, rather reluctantlyat the time, as a great deal connected with its organization jarred upon our own taste, but we were led tobelieve in the Brothers and their interest in the Societyin spite of the fact that the O.L.’s behaviour offendedgood taste in many ways, especially in her treatmentof Colonel Olcott, to whom she dealt out very roughlanguage from time to time and tyrannised over to anexasperating degree.
“ Do you think ”—I rememberhe once said to me those words or to that effect—“ thatI would stand going about with that mad Frenchwoman, if I did not know what lies behind her.” Onone occasion he lectured at a public hall on some
aspect of Theosophy, with Mr. A. O. Hume in thechair, and not being favourably impressed by hisaddress the O.L. abused him violently in the course
as
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
of our drive home. In a book I wrote long afterwardsl_""‘ Incidents in the Life of Madame Blavatsky ”—Irefer to this occasion, saying :—“ To hear her talk onthis subject at intervals during the evening one mighthave thought the aspirations of her life com
promised.“ There was another bad outbreak on the
evening she and Colonel Olcott left us—the 30th ofDecember. She had forgotten a shawl and threw theblame on the long suffering Colonel, but I need notgo here into further detail of that kind. I myself as
we grew intimate found it diflicult to bear with hertempers, and I see allusions to this in my wife’s Diary--a most valuable record, as it has turned out to be,of the events associated with the growth of our relations with the Society.
In spite of somewhat mixed feelings concerningthem we invited our guests to pay us another visit atSimla, where by this time it had become possible forus to spend the hot weather months. They arrivedthere on the 8th of September, 1880. At this time a
good many branches of the Society had been established by Colonel Olcott, but no one had as yet anyglimmering notion even of the ultimate destiniesawaiting it
,
or of the purpose it was designed by theMasters to fulfil. This is shown—as indeed in otherways also——by a letter Colonel Olcott wrote while withus at Simla to the Foreign Secretary asking to berelieved from all suspicion of political intrigue. Theletter is quoted in his “Diary Leaves ” and in it hedescribes the Society as organised “for the definedpurpose of studying the religions, philosophies andsciences of ancient Asia.”*'
The events attending the presence of MadameBlavatsky at Simla at the period above-mentioned are
" op. cit. 2nd Edition. p. 178
"OLD DIARY Lxavzcs, vol. ii. p. 229.
26
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
described for the most part in my book “ The OccultWorld,” and it will not be necessary to go over the
same story again. The manifestations of occult powerthen freely given had a profound effect on my ownmind. I felt that those who exhibited such marvellous power over natural forces unfamiliar to physicalscience must possess knowledge to correspond. Inregard to the management of the Society, Madame
Blavatsky showed curious inaptitude for the work, and
this led me on one occasion to say that I wished 1
could get into communication with one of the “ Brothers ” she talked about. I felt sure they would be
more reasonable people to deal with than herself. Conversation showed that she thought this might not be
impossible, and I wrote a letter addressed to “ A Brother” and gave it to Madame Blavatsky for transmission. In due course I received a reply, and thiswas the first of a long series of letters from the MastersK. H. and M. which led to the preparation of “ TheOccult World ” and afterwards to “Esoteric Buddhism."
I may as well at once explain, what I only came
to realise myself in the progress of later years, the truecharacter of this correspondence. The letters werenot, in the beginning what I imagined them to be-—
letters actually written by the Master and then forwarded by occult means either to Madame Blavatskyor deposited somewhere about the house where Ishoufd find them. They were certainly inspired byK. H. (all in the beginning bore his signature) butfor the most part, if not always, were dictations to a
competent clairaudient amanuensis and Madame Blavatsky was generally the amanuensis in question.They contained passages of great charm and literarybeauty, and making careful selections, I gave some ofthese in “ The Occult Wor1d.” But from the first
21
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Madame Blavatsky seems to have been possessed withthe belief that she could improve on and expand the
Masters’ communications. This did not matter so
much in the beginning, but later on when the letters
were devoted to the conveyance of teaching in occultscience, and became the material I worked with inwriting “ Esoteric Buddhism” Madame Blavatsky’sexpansions, additions and “impr0r1ements” (P) were
almost disastrous. Long after she passed away fromthis life, as my methods of communication with theMasters assumed new and improved conditions, I have
discussed this matter with the Master K. H. and inreference to some passages in the letters of the teach
ing period he has frankly told me that as they stand,they are “
a travesty” of his meaning.
None the less they contained masses of informationconcerning the natural truths that have since become
the fundamental ideas underlying Theosophy whichwere previously as unknown to Madame Blavatsky as
to myself. Reincarnation, Karma, the planetarychains, the succession of the root races‘, then sub-racesand so on, were not tampered with. Madame Blavatsky did not know enough about them at that timeto make it possible for her to import confusion intoinformation on those subjects which passed throughher hands. But unhappily she had contracted—underconditions I will not attempt to elucidate—a bitter de
testation of spiritualism, and sometimes when the let
ters touched on after-death conditions she wove thisfeeling into them. The result was dreadfully misleading, and the consequences very deplorable, as thisnarrative will show later on.
Reverting now to the course of events at the Simlaperiod in 1880, I must explain that Mr. A. O. Hume,the head of one Department of the Government ofIndia, took a deep interest in the wonderful phe
28 .
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
nomena then in progress through the agency of—orby personal power of—Madame Blavatsky. I showedhim the letters I received from the Master K. H., and
he in turn wrote to the Master himself and received
replies. We worked at this time, and later on againin close co-operation. “The Occult World” willshow this more in detail.
In December Madame Blavatsky paid us anothervisit at Allahabad and in March, 1881, my wife andI went for a second holiday trip to England. I wrote" The Occult World ” at sea during the voyage homeand it was published soon after our arrival.
Now for the first time I made the acquaintance of
‘Mr. C. C. Massey and Mr. Hood, the leading mem
bers of the embryonic Theosophical Society in Londonwhere a lively and cordial recollection of Madame Blavatsky’s visit was entertained, but where as yet no progress had been made towards even comprehending the
ultimate purpose of the Theosophical movement. Theexperiences recorded in “The Occult World,” however, gave a great stimulus to the infant Society. Themeetings in Great Russell Street were tinged with a
new interest. Eager expectation prevailed. Nobodyknew what to expect, but everybody expected some
thing. Amongst other uncertainties was one whichgave rise to some ludicrous incidents occasionally.Were we, or were we not to be a secret society? Colonel Olcott, inclining to be attached to form and cere
mony, had invented a ceremony of “ initiation ” intothe Society, that newly joining members were calledupon to go through. They were taught a form ofwords to be used in addressing a stranger, if one de
sired to ascertain whether he was a member of theSociety or not. These had to be answered, if he werea member, by other forms of words and there was a
rather clumsy hand grip to be learned. I never liked all
19
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
this aflectation of mystery when we really had nothingto conceal, and contrived a little later on to sweep it allaway, but it was still in operation at the period_I am
dealing with. And I remember how at one of the
meetings one of the original members more or less incharge of the arrangements came to me and told me
there was a strange lady outside who said she was atheosophist and wanted to come in, but did not knowthe signs ! Was she to be admitted ? I said yes, andthe lady then admitted was no other than Mrs. Gebhard whom I then saw for the first time. She hadactually come over from Germany for the express purpose of getting into touch with the new movement inLondon (and with ourselves) and played a very important part in the movement later on. If it had notbeen that I was already rather contemptuous aboutthe initiation signs she would have been denied admission to our little meeting and might—had she beenof a different temper—have been disgusted with the
whole undertaking, instead of becoming, as she soondid, one of its most useful allies.
From time to time in later years there has been
here and there some recrudescence of a desire to decorate theosophical membership with secret signs andpasswords of the Freemasonic order. The love ofsecrecy for its own sake is a curious human attributenot infrequently encountered, but is rather undignifiedreally when there is nothing to conceal. For thosein a position to advance along the Path, in full physical consciousness and to acquire real occult knowledge and power, secrecy of the most inviolable orderis a matter of course, but membership in the Theosophical Society does not involve that kind of knowledge.It gives us knowledge of priceless importance; the
knowledge that the higher kind of knowledge is obtainable, but we need not go on to enact a falsehood,
30
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
the pretence that we have already in our possessionmysteries that must be shielded from profane eyes.
The absurdity of such pretence is emphasised whenwe realise that the whole purpose of the Theosophicalmovement as designed by the White Lodge is to offerthe world for public consumption information concerning the laws governing spiritual progress that showhow its acceleration may be accomplished. I havesometimes ventured to assert that the real purpose ofthe Theosophical Movement is to recruit the WhiteLodge l Not for the sake of the White Lodge but forthe sake of the recruits! And when we deal withmore familiar formulas, it will be seen on close inspection that they are really imbedded in the simplerone I have suggested. So the notion of putting upfences round the Society to keep off intruders is ridiculous in a way analagous to a contradiction in terms.
That does not mean that every theosophical meetingsh'ould be open to all comers. In any lodge wherethe members are genuine students, they will graduallybecome familiar with volumes of information concerning unseen worlds to which outsiders even of advancedcommonplace culture are total strangers. Meetings ofsuch lodges, where advanced studies are going on, aremanifestly suited to “members only” but that does notmean that they are handling mysteries from acquaintance with which non-members must be excluded.
Real initiations are so solemn and serious that theyare merely caricatured by such sham solemnities aswere at one time adopted as initiations into the Theosophical Society and will never again, I hope, be
operative to jar the good taste of those who may bedrawn towards it by appreciation of the light it throwson the approach to higher wisdom.
31
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
/
CHAPTER III
URING our visit to London in 1881, a littleD incident occurred which has a retrospectiveinterest. We had become intimate in India
with Sir Lewis Pelly, engaged in some important
diplomatic work during Lord Lytton’s Vice-royalty,and he was already settled at home in England inI881, at 1, Eaton Square. There, Lady Pelly on one
occasion said that she would like me to give a drawingroom lecture on the new occult experiences I had been
having. At first the idea rather startled me, as I had
never at that time been in the habit of addressingaudiences by word of mouth, however familiar withthe use of the pen. But I duly gave the lecture beforea picked and influential gathering of Sir Lewis’ andLady Pelly’s friends. I have no record of what Isaid and my knowledge at that time was in such a
crudely elementary stage that I suspect I must havetalked a good deal of what I should now think to be
nonsense, however, there were none present qualifiedto criticise my utterances which were at all eventsearnest and sincere. I well remember Mr. H. R.Haweis, the very broad church clergyman, sitting inthe front row and listening attentively. At a muchlater date after the publication of “ Esoteric Buddhism ” I lectured more than once at his own housein Cheyne Walk, Chelsea, but the lecture at Sir LewisPelly’s has some historical interest as the very firstutterance of the kind, addressed to a general audiencein England. I wish I could focus it on the exact date,but for once my wife’s Diary does not help me. TheDiary has been exceedingly useful to me in the pre
32
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
paration of the current narrative. It was begunshortly after our marriage in 1870, and steadily continued right up to my wife’s final illness in 1908. Itis not a record of thoughts and feelings, but a plainrecord of events—of our doings and experiencesthroughout all those years. But during our visit toEngland in 1881 my wife was ill a part of the time,and staying at a residential hotel in Norwood. TheDiary records her own doings there, but at the time Imyself was staying at rooms in London, at DownStreet, so my personal doings, except for my constantvisits to Norwood, do not get recorded.
One circumstance, I remember, connected with thePelly lecture had to do with one of my audience, thena young man with a very serious inclination towardsmysticism who actually went out to India shortly afterwards in pursuit of further knowledge. His father,Sir Lewis told me, said to him on one occasion‘: “ Doyou know you have lost me a son l” alluding to thelecture, as he supposed the determining factor in hisson’s course of action. That was not really the case,for the son in question was a friend of the little groupthen the nucleus of the British Theosophical Society,and in touch with their early activities. The “ OccultWorld ” as I have already said had given a great stimulus to these activities, but it was after my return toIndia in ]une, 1881, that I began to receive letters fromthe Master containing specific teaching concerninghuman evolution, the origin and destiny of theHuman race which eventually, a year or two later,furnished the information which enabled me to write"
Esoteric Buddhism.”Conditions of health had rendered it necessary for
my wife to remain in England longer than it was possible for me to do so, and I stayed for a time, duringthe remaining hot months, at Mr. Hume’s house in
33 c
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Simla, during part of which time Madame Blavatskywas a fellow guest. This was a very stormy period,associated, it is true, with some phenomenal occur
rences of interest but chiefly with the development of
profound discontent on Mr. Hume’s part—a discon
tent which I shared——with Madame Blavatsky as a
collaborator in the work we now felt ourselves to be
concerned with, the disclosure for the benefit of the
world at large, of the knowledge (or some part of it)
previously in the exclusive possession of the WhiteLodge. The situation was curiously embarrassing.Madame Blavatsky in spite of all her shortcomingswas our only channel of communication with the occultworld. At first, crediting her with more knowledgethan she actually possessed we endeavoured to extractspecific teaching from her. We appointed times each
day for these efforts and I still have the M.S. bookin which I recorded the results, of a very unsatisfactorycharacter. Some extracts from the volume will showthe way we struggled with our difficulties. My notes
as they stand are put in the form of question andanswer, the questions being rather the outcome of previous conversation than deliberately formulated byourselves. For example we ask :—
“ What are the different kinds of knowledge ? Theanswer is :.— Dgyu, and the unreal—Dgyu -- mi.”
Much time was spent—or wasted—on endeavours topronounce these words in a satisfactory manner. Inquiring further we were told :— “Real knowledgedeals with eternal verities and primal causes. Theunreal only with illusory effects.”
The Lhas or Adepts, we were told, alone possess thereal knowledge—“ The Khas has made the perfectjunction of his soul with the universal mind . . .
The profane cannot become a Dang-ma (purified soul)
34
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
for he lacks means of perceiving Chhag, genesis or the
beginning of things.”A little further on :— “ Everything in the occult
universe, which embraces all the primal causes, is
based upon the principles—Kosmic energy (Fohat, orbreath of wisdom, and Kosmic idealism Thyam-kam
(the knowledge of bringing about) giving the impulseto Kosmic energy in the right direction.”
At every step we get new words, some I believe ofSanscrit origin, some Tibetan, and our attempts toattach definite meaning to them were not very success
ful. The word “purush ” is introduced. We ask“Are we to understand purush as another name forspace, or as a different thing occupying every part ofspace P” Answer :-— “
Swayambu occupies everypart of space ? which itself is boundless and eternal.Swayambu becomes purush when coming in contactwith matter.”
All this was very unsatisfactory and did not helpus towards investing theosophy with claims to theattention of the cultured Europeans. Some letterswhich came through from the Master helped us muchbetter; but meanwhile friction between Mr. Hume andMadame Blavatsky became more and more serious.Looking back to private conversations I had with Mr.Hume at this period it seems to me that he was deeplyin earnest and genuinely desirous of devoting himselfto the great work of illuminating the outer world withthe splendid vision our opportunities, imperfect as theywere, had enabled us to form of the occult world andits concern with human progress. But no two naturescould have been more entirely out of tune with anotherthan his and Madame Blavatsky’s. Without losingpatience with her to the same extent, I felt with himthat she was an impossible person to work with indouble harness in the western world. 'We had heard
35
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
by this time of a super-master over the Master K. H.whom we knew of as “
the Old Chohan." We deter
mined to try the experiment of addressing a letter to
him declaring that if we were to do any good in con
nexion with the spread of theosophy we must be some
how enabled to work quite independently of Madame
Blavatsky. Looking back from my present point of
view, I know that this was an absurd course to
take, but it brought matters to a crisis. Ridiculous as
the situation was the only way of sending the letterwas, to give it to the person of whom it complained—Madame Blavatsky. I remember going in search ofher; finding her at the piano in the ball room of Mr.Hume’s house, giving her the letter which she put inher pocket without even looking at it. I went awayto the room in which I did my work and in a very fewminutes Madame Blavatsky burst in. She was paleto whiteness with excitement. “ What had I been
doing?” she almost screamed. I said the matter couldnot be talked over by us alone. I must fetch Mr.Hume. He came and a terrible scene ensued. Hewas scrupulously polite, but freezingly cold. MadameBlavatsky in one of her most flaming tempers.
This incident was one of the many crises or turningpoints in the early history of—I will not say the Theosophical Society, for at that time nothing worth callingby that name had yet come into existence—but of the
early work undertaken with the view of building a
Theosophical'Society on the ill designed foundationlaid down some years previously. What would havehappened had the breach with Mr. Hume beenaverted ? He was certainly an important force in anyundertaking he was concerned with. Madame Blavatsky used to maintain that he was of too domineering nature to work under even the Master’s guidance.I think she was mistaken, and anyhow the mere fact
36
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
that he was led to separate himself from the theosoph
ical movement was no proof that he was eliminated bythe Master’s intention. Their plans continually go
wrong, through the fallibility of the human agents
they have to work with, and probably no one connectedwith their work has disconcerted more plans than has
been done by Madame Blavatsky herself.Before the final crisis just described a good many
letters had been received from the Master K. H., some
addressed to myself, some to Mr. Hume, and I had
begun to get information leading up to the accumulation which ultimately enabled me to write “ EsotericBuddhism.” Some of this teaching was published inthe “ Theosophist ” under the heading “Fragments ofOccult Truth.’ Most of these were contributed by myself on the basis of the information obtained at the
period I have been describing and a little later on.When Mr. Hume detached himself from Madame Blavatsky my own intimacy with him faded graduallyaway, but my correspondence with the Masters grewmore and more important and the Master Morya wroteto me at length during a period when the Master K. H.was preoccupied in other ways.
My wife got back to India in the beginning of]anuary, 1882. In March that year Madame Blavatskywas with us for a few days at Allahabad, but not during the later months at Simla. She was again with usat Allahabad in November, and during that visit Iobtained a profile sketch of the Master K. H. underperfect conditions guaranteeing its occult origin. Ihad been expressing a wish for a portrait of him : hadbeen directed to leave a piece of blank paper about the
drawing room : had done so, putting it in a large bookon the table and had looked at it frequently for some
days without finding it changed. One morning ongoing in to our midday breakfast in the dining room,
37
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
from which the drawing room en suite with it was
plainly visible, my wife looked at the paper and it was
still blank. During breakfast Madame Blavatsky,then with us, became aware that an astral visitor was
in the drawing room and directly we had finished
breakfast we went to look at the paper, and it bore the
portrait still in my possession and with which scores
of theosophical friends in later years have become
familiar.Another important incident of the period, on the
physical plane entirely, was an intimation from Mr.Rattigan who (by purchase from Mr. Allen) had be
come the principal proprietor of the “ Pioneer,” that
he no longer needed my services as Editor. He had
been from the first intensely unsympathetic with myinterest in the occult development, but as this is nota personal biography—even though the early historyof the Society is linked so closely with my wife andmyself, so that some personal explanations have been
necessary-—-I need only say a few more words on the
subject, but for my connection with Theosophy itwould have been unlikely that my connexion withthe “ Pioneer” would have been disturbed at thisperiod. There was some friction between myselfand the new proprietors, but my success as writerhad become fairly conspicuous and the frictionsuch as it was would not have been enough tobreak the tie. But again both my wife and I hadgrown tired of the Indian life and wished to be backin England. It seemed just possible that the savingsof our time in India, plus journalistic work at home,would enable us to live there in moderate comfort, sothat we contemplated my resignation of the“ Pioneer ”
editorship as a step we might be inclinedto take. The parting therefore was neither strainednor unfriendly, and for many years after my return to
38
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
England I continued to write articles of various kindsfor the paper in India.
We left Allahabad finally in February, 1883, and
on our way home stayed for a few days with Madame
Blavatsky at Adyar. Colonel Olcott in his “ DiaryLeaves ” describes how he came into possession of the
building at that place which has ever since been the
headquarters of the Theosophical Society, already wellestablished in India, though so far merely an embryoin the Western world. The purchase was effected on
very easy terms, equivalent to about £600 of Englishmoney. This was partly provided for as a gift by a
wealthy Indian friend, the rest by a loan guaranteedby the same friend and another and paid off within a
year by the proceeds of a subscription. When we
arrived in March we found the “ Old Lady ”very com
fortably established there, and with her usual emphaticlanguage she assured us that she meant to stay therefor the rest of her life. Europeans, she declared,would never understand Theosophy. Her work lay inIndia.
I had already begun to write “ Esoteric Buddhism ”
and went on with the work during our stay at Adyar.And though no longer especially in search of occultphenomena some were brought about by circumstances, the most striking in a way I will describe. Iwas writing in a room available for that purpose, andas I went on I made notes of questions for the Master.My wife one morning came in; I asked her to take upthe paper of notes then ready and give them to the“ O.L.” for transmission. She did so and told meafterwards what happened. The O.L. was at herwriting table. On the opposite wall of the room a
small cupboard two or three feet long each way, thegift of an Indian admirer, was hanging up. It wasan ornamental little bit of furniture. Madame Blavat
39
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
sky had already made use of it to hold some relics of
her stay with the Masters in Tibet and she or others
about the house had got into the habit of calling it“ The Shrine.”
When my wife offered Madame Blavatsky my paperof notes she simply said—without getting up—“ Putit in the Shrine.” This my wife did, and sat downon a sofa near Madame Blavatsky’s table and went ontalking with her, for five or ten minutes. ThenMadame Blavatsky said, “ I think he has sent you the
answer.” My wife went over to the Shrine; openedit and found lying on my paper of notes,—the Master’sanswer. The little incident was not surprising to usat the time. We had by then had large experience ofsimilar phenomena, but much later on “ The Shrine ”
was accused—so to speak—of being a conjuring deviceused by Madame Blavatsky for the purpose of trickery,so the experience just described, one of many others ofa similar kind, will help to dissipate that delusion.
40
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
CHAPTER IV
Y wife and I arrived in London in April,M 1883, and events beganto move rapidly inconnexion with the young Theosophical
Society. I had for some time been in correspondencewith Mr. Massey and had sent him the
“Fragments
”
as they appeared and the new outburst of teachingand information was not alone interesting to him, butalso to the group of his friends then concerned withthe establishment of the Society for PsychicalResearch. I was at once made acquainted with this
group, namely with Mr. Frederic Myers, Mr. Gurneyand Professor Sidgewick and was received by themand others with great cordiality. By this timeDr. Anna Kingsford and Mr. E. Maitland had joinedthe Theosophical Society, and at a meeting held on
Ianuary 7th, I883, Mrs. Kingsford was elected
President and fresh names were added to the list ofmembers at every meeting.
Miss Francesca Arundale now plays a conspicuouspart in the work. She and her mother were residingat 77, Elgin Crescent, Notting Hill, and while mywife and I were still unsettled that house became the
scene of continual informal meetings of the mosteager members of the young society. Wherever wewent, rapidly making new acquaintances in London,interested inquirers gathered round us. By this timethe Society had a Council and its meetings arerecorded in the minute book. On the 6th of May Iappear to have been present at such a meeting, and Ipresided apparently at a subsequent meeting of the
4!
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
“ Fellows” on the same day, giving an address onthe origin and prospects of the Society.
Hitherto the custom had been at all meetings forthe members present to sign the minute book, but as
numbers increase this custom is apparently found tooinconvenient and is dropped.
An important meeting was held on the 3rd of ]uneat Mr. Massey’s rooms, I, Albert Mansions, VictoriaStreet, when among many others Mr. Frederic Myersis duly elected a member. By Mrs. Kingsford’s wishit was decided “that this branch of the Society be infuture called the London Lodge of the TheosophicalSociety, and that the secretary be requested to writeto the President, Colonel Olcott, intimating thisdecision and suggesting it as a precedent for theadoption of other branches."
On or about the 1 1th of ]une“ Esoteric Buddhism ”
was published and at once became the subject of studyat the meetings of the Society.
'
Introduced by Mr. Myers I was a frequent visitorat Mrs. Tennant’s (Richmond Terrace, Whitehall)from which centre interest in the Theosophicaldevelopment radiated into London society at large toa very remarkable extent.
Mr. Sam \Vard—known by his intimate friends,who were very numerous, as “Uncle Sam”—hadjoined the Society and was a zealous worker in thecause besides being a very kind friend to ourselves.
In August we went abroad for a long continentaltour and in the course of it made the acquaintance ofthe Gebhard family at Elberfeld. They played soimportant a part in later events that I must explainthis development more fully. Mrs. Gebhard—English by birth though married to a German—had longbeen deeply interested in occultism. She had madethe acquaintance of Eliphas Levi, whom long before
42
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
she knew us, she had entertained at Elberfeld. Shecame over to London on hearing of our arrival in
I883 to make our acquaintance and joined the Society.She urgently invited us to visit her at Elberfeld butwe were disinclined to do this not knowing the othermembers of her large family. But as in any case we
were passing through Cologne in the course of the
tour I have just referred to we consented to divergefrom our route and pay a visit to Elberfeld underconditions which would easily enable us to cut it veryshort if we so desired. As matters turned out we
enjoyed the visit exceedingly, found Mr. Gebhardand his grown up sons courteous and agreeable, sooninterested in our theosophical talk, and althoughbefore we went there—as we learned afterwardsMrs. Gebhard’s interest in occultism was the subjectof good humoured chaff by her husband and sons,under our influence the whole family eventuallybecame ardent Theosophists, and our experimentalvisit, besides being a good deal protracted, was theforerunner of many others in later years, of some
associated with Madame Blavatsky’s appearance inEurope I shall have to speak later.
Early in October we returned to London, and soonafterwards trouble began to affect the Society. At a
meeting held on the 21st Mr. Maitland read anaddress from the President, Mrs. Kingsford unablefor some reason to be present herself, and the tone ofit gave deep offence to most of those who were present.It seems to have been partly an attack on my book“ Esoteric Buddhism ” and generally an unfavourable review of the Eastern teaching. An animateddiscussion ensued and finally a resolution “ that the
meeting hears with regret the terms in which the
President refers to the Brothers in her openingaddress ” was carried by 15 to 4. Mrs. Kingsford
43
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
seems to have sent a more or less apologetic messagein reply. This was read at a meeting held on the 4thof November, and the trouble blew over for the time.
On the 15th of December, I see, “the Rev. CharlesWebster Leadbeater” was proposed by myself and
elected a member amongst others. He had alreadymade our acquaintance, having called on me at thehouse where we were then staying in Royal Crescent,
Notting Hill, before having taken 7, LadbrokeGardens, whither we moved shortly afterwards. Hehad read “Esoteric Buddhism” and had at oncebecome inflamed with a desire to become a regular“chela." Both my wife and I were agreeably im
pressed by him and he became our frequent guest.About this time (or sooner; I cannot fix the exact
date) I received news from India—to my dismay—thatMadame Blavatsky having changed her mind in
regard to her intention declared to us when we sawher at Adyar, of staying there for the rest of her life,was coming to England, accompanied by ColonelOlcott. I felt that such an arrangement would be
disastrous, though I failed to foresee the exactcharacter of the disaster which ultimately ensued. Iknew that the Theosophical movement had now takenroot in London on a social level that would be quiteout of tune with the personalities of the two“ founders,” especially with that of Colonel Olcott.Madame Blavatsky’s manners were very rough, buteveryone of quick perception would see that herroughness was deliberately assumed—that she was notignorant of refined ways and customs, even whileaggressively flouting them. Moreover she had tactin emergencies and was conscious of influences thatwould guard her from giving needless offence toEnglish people of the kind now becoming interestedin theosophy. Still even so far as she was concerned
44
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
her coming would be a serious danger. Our experience in introducing her to Anglo-Indian friends hadnot been encouraging. One had to know her verythoroughly to be able to ignore characteristics thatwere repellent rather than attractive. Even as regardsher powers, which rendered her the object, in con
sequence of my description of them in “ The OccultWorld ” of excited interest among the most earnestmembers of the growing society, I knew how easilytheir exhibition by some clumsiness on her part,would provoke suspicion rather than trust. It was
supremely desirable in the interests of the movementthat she should remain away from England. For anypersons whose ardour was sufficiently intense to takethem to India on a pilgrimage to see her—well and
good. By the hypothesis their zeal would stand the
strain. But Madame Blavatsky in London amidstthe flood of people mostly belonging to the upperstrata of society; I knew that trouble must ensue.
As regarded Colonel Olcott anxieties of that orderwere intensified to a terrible extent. I myself hadcause to respect Colonel Olcott’s character very sin
cerely. I knew him to be irrevocably devoted to the
cause which was ever assuming more and more
commanding importance in my own sight—but~—the
superficial aspects of his personality were of a kindquite certain to set the teeth on edge with Englishmen of the type of those who were leading the PsychicResearch movement, and already in the most intimateand cordial relations with ourselves—the importers of
theosophy into this country——and with those who had
already allied themselves with us as exponents of thenew revelation.
I could only protest. I did so in the letter addressedto the Master K. H. (which of course had to passthrough Madame Blavatsky’s hands) and I got back'
45
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
an answer which later experience makes me now feel
pretty sure was Madame’s own composition. She was
resolved to come—to take part in or enjoy what
Colonel Olcott at the time described as“ the boom ”
of theosophy in Europe.On the 31st ]anuary, 1884, we moved into our new
house, 7, Ladbroke Gardens. For some time past our
most interesting theosophical gatherings had taken
place at Miss Arundale’s in Elgin Crescent, where the
most earnest members of the Society constituted a spe
cial group, though without any elaborate formalities—“ Mabel Collins” (otherwise Mrs. Kenningale Cook)was one of us and very helpful at that time in ourstudies as she was intensely sensitive and under the
direct influence—as I came to know later—of the
Master Hilarion. On one occasion——arising out of
conversations on Karma and the Path, she received
from him a clairaudient dictation on those subjects.We were all so much impressed by this paper thatwe felt it was not one to be kept merely for our privateedification, so we made arrangements to have it
printed and it was published under the title originallygiven to the group paper by its unseen author—“ Light on the Path.” Few probably of the multitudes who have come to reverence that little book veryprofoundly have any idea of the circumstances underwhich it was produced. .
“ Light on the Path ” was not the only dictationemanating from the Master Hilarion. About thistime, or rather some time previously,
“ Mabel Collins ” had been living in chambers on the AdelphiTerrace overlooking the river and near where Cleopatra’s Needle had then recently been set up. Hernatural gift of clairvoyance enabled her to see the greatstone surrounded frequently with Egyptian “Spirits,”as she would have called them then, and processions
46
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
of them used sometimes to pass through her room.
One in particular attracted her attention as she sat
writing, for she was already a novelist and then en
gaged on some collection of short stories. Hardlyaware of the change as she went on writing she found
afterwards that she had begun an entirely new story.From time to time the inspiration was renewed and
that is the way in which the book now familiar to
Theosophical readers,“ The Idyl of the White
Lotus,” came into existence. Interesting circumstances attended its production. After it was halffinished the inspiration suddenly stopped. Mrs. Cookcould not recover it
,
and so eventually, in order thatthe work done might not be wasted, finished it outof her own head. But when the Theosophical movement was set on foot, and she became attached to the
group meeting at Miss Arundale’s, the inspirationwas renewed and the story~completed by the originalauthor in his own way. Anyhow the Idyl as it
was completed by the Master Hilarion—for it was he
who managed the whole matter—is probably based
upon some very remote experience of his own in an
early Egyptian incarnation.Settled now in Ladbroke Gardens, with a large
drawing room, our house was soon frequented by ourfriends, and friends of our friends, who were becom
ing interested in the new development of thought andknowledge. We were at home, always, on Tuesdayafternoons and my wife’s Diary is filled every weekwith long lists of our Tuesday visitors. The movement in this way spread at first in what may in a
broad sense be called the upper levels of society, and
it appeared to me desirable that it should take rootthat way to begin with, its influence being left to filterdownwards with social authority behind it
,
instead ofbeginning on lower levels and trusted to filter upwards
47
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
if it could. Unhappily this programme was defeated
by Madame Blavatsky’s return to England, as the
record of later events will show.An important event in connexion with the earlier
progress of the work took place in advance of the
period dealt with above when our house in LadbrokeGardens had become the vortex of the whole move
ment. A conversazione in our honour was organisedby the Society and was held at Prince’s Hall in Piccadilly on the 17th of ]uly, 1883. About 300 peoplewere present. Mrs. Kingsford and I delivered addresses. The audience was cordial and sympatheticand the evening may fairly be described as havingbeen brilliantly successful.
Dating from this demonstration, the next six oreight months may be regarded as the high water period in the early life of the Society in England.Troubles arose within it
, but its relations with theouter world were untinged by these. Of course,
playing the conspicuous partrin its programme thatfell to my share, I was the object of more or less goodhumoured comment in the newspapers, and the“Saturday Review,” I remember, then in the zenithof its glory, had an article about me entitled “ TheMahdi in Society”—(the Mahdi in Egypt being atthat time the “false Prophet " of the Soudan)—butall that badinage only kept the subject before the
public mind, and failed entirely to check the growthof interest in Theosophy, among cultured people.And my own relations with the leaders of the PsychicResearch Society, then in its promising infancy, wereso cordial that the two movements seemed almost des
tined to coalesce. Mr. Myers—signing himself “ AnEnglish F.T.S.”—drew up a series of questionsarising out of the contents of “ Esoteric Buddhism ”
and these were published in the “ Theosophist ” to
48
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
gether with very long answers written I believe bySubba Rao—a distinguished Indian theosophist and“ chela ” of the Masters. He, I may parentheticallyremark, had been instructed by his occult chief (or“
Guru”) to give me help in the preparation of thatbook, and I made his acquaintance during our stayin Madras on our way home. But all the Indianoccult students of that period were intensely jealous ofwestern inquirers. They resented the idea that the
arcane knowledge of the East should overflow into the
western world. They were doubly wrong of course,first in supposing that occult wisdom was eastern inits origin. For that origin we have to go back to
Atlantean times and further still; secondly in failingto realise that India was honoured and not hurt bybecoming a channel, in a certain sense, of the newrevelation. But anyhow the Indian chelas were
jealous, and much trouble arose later on from thisattitude on their part. Subba Rao shared the jealousy, and while pretending to act on the Master’sinstructions, did not really give me any help whatever. At a later period the Master K. H. in a letter
to me, referred to the two “teachers ” I had been intouch with at Madras—Subba Rao and Madame Blavatsky—“ one of whom would not and the other couldnot ”
give me any help' Madame Blavatsky at thattime would have been willing enough to help me, butwonderful as were her powers she possessed none ofthe detailed knowledge we now call theosophical teach
ing. She picked it up as the letters from the Mastersaddressed to me passed through her hands and wasable to expand it a good deal in the light of her generaloccult knowledge.
Coming back to Mr. Myers’ sympathetic criticismof “ Esoteric Buddhism ” I must quote one or two
passages as showing—what it seems important to
49 1)
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
establish at this stage of the narrative-that the
leaders of the S.P.R. were not alone friendly with thenew development, but really cordial. Mr. Myers be
gins :— “The object of the following paper is tosubmit certain questions which have occurred to some
English readers of ‘ Esoteric Buddhism.’ We havehad the great advantage of hearing Mr. Sinnett himself explain many points which perplexed us, and itis with his sanction that we now venture to ask thatsuch light as permissible may be thrown upon some
difliculties which, so far as we can discover, remain as
yet unsolved.”The last paragraph of the paper in question is one
that I feel embarrassed in quoting, but it is obviouslyimportant, in the interests of a true appreciation ofthe story I have to tell, that the mental attitude of the
S.P.R. leaders at the time I have now reached shouldbe rightly apprehended. Mr. Myers winds up hisinquiries as follows :—
“ We gratefully recognise the very acceptablechoice which the Adepts have made in selecting Mr.Sinnett as the intermediary between us and them.They could hardly have chosen anyone more congenial to our Western minds, whether we consider theclearness of his written style, the urbanity of his verbalexposition or the earnest sincerity of his convictions.”
Mr. Myers’ paper and the elaborate answers ofSubba Rao will be found by any readers who wish toconsult them in a volume entitled “Five years ofTheosophy,” consisting of various extracts from themonthly
“ Theosophist ”published during that
period.
50
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
' CHAPTER V
HE troubles within the Society to which I referred above arose from the attitude adoptedby Mrs. Kingsford. She had already pub
lished her very remarkable volume “ The PerfectWay.” It was deeply tinged with occult truth andin co-operation with Mr. Maitland, Mrs. Kingsfordhad, I believe, organised a society called the HermeticSociety for the study of spiritual mysteries along the
lines marked out by her own book. In joining the
Theosophical Society shortly before our return fromIndia, it seems to me—looking back at that time in
the light of later events—that she aimed rather at
absorbing it into the Hermetic Society than at following up the promise of further teaching to be derivedfrom an Eastern source. However that may be she
began in the early months of 1884 to make unfavourable comments on “ Esoteric Buddhism.”
Already the Society had passed a resolution (on the
3rd of ]une, 1883),“ That this Lodge for the present
devotes itself chiefly to the study of occult philosophyas taught by the Adepts of India with whom Mr.Sinnett has been in communication.” The minutesdo not show, nor does my recollection show preciselywhat words or action on Mrs. Kingsford’s partprompted this declaration, but at a meeting on the21st of October Mr. Maitland read an address fromMrs Kingsford, not present herself on that occasion,that began serious disturbances of the Society’s previously perfect harmony. The minutes of the meet
ing do not include the address but merely state thatMr. Maitland read it
, and go on as follows :—
51
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
“ Mr. Sinnett protested against the language of the
address, expressing regret and indignation at the termsin which she referred to the Brothers. He saw thatit would be necessary for him to bring a resolutionon the subject before the Society, but before doing so
would wait to hear some expression of opinion on the
subject from the members.“ Mr. Finch expressed great regret at the language
of the address and in order that the discussion mightassume a regular form moved that ‘ the meeting heardwith regret the President’s address.’ ”
A prolonged discussion ensued, Mr. Maitlandurging delay, but Mr. Finch’s resolution was in the
end carried by 15 to 4.Figures of this kind, I may remark in passing,
afford no indication of the numerical strength of theSociety at that time. New members in ever increasing number were elected at every meeting but comparatively few seem to have attended the meetingsregularly, perhaps from an impression that they were
generally concerned rather with the business of theSociety than with the progress of our teaching, at thattime indeed rather in a stagnant condition. Sometimes when some expectations lent special interest toa meeting the numbers present suddenly expanded,and at a meeting in April, 1884, to be describeddirectly, the minute book records the presence of“ about 80" members.
At a meeting of the Society on November 4th anattempt was made by Mr. Maitland (again in Mrs.Kingsford’s absence) to calm down the feelings excitedby her address. He read a letter from her “ disclaiming any intention of unfriendliness or disparagementin regard to the Brothers.” The patronising toneadopted has a grotesquely absurd flavour from thepoint of view of current knowledge and shows how
52
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Ycompletely Mrs. Kingsford failed to understand the
movement in which she was presuming to take a part.However at the time the actual plan of the “ Brothers ” in the Divine hierarchy was very imperfectlyunderstood, and the trouble started by Mrs. Kingsford’s address to the Lodge spread over various pamphlets issued afterwards. One by Mrs. Kingsfordwas entitled “ A letter to the Fellows of the LondonLodge of the Theosophical Society, by the Presidentand Vice-President of the Lodge.” This is an elaborate, and highly unfavourable criticism (in 39 pages)of my book “ Esotoric Buddhism.” It is not worthwhile at this later date to examine these criticismsin detail. They gave rise to much further pamphleteering at the time. I published one answerand the well-known Indian theosophist Mr. T.Subba Rao issued another dealing elaborately withMrs. Kingsford’s attack and she followed this
up with another pamphlet, a“ Reply to the
observation of Mr. T. Subba Rao.” Her attitudeof mind may be sufficiently understood if I quote oneshort passa.ge at the beginning of her first letter.She says :— “ At the time when the appeal to acceptoffice in the Society was made to me I was not oneof the Fellows but an independent worker in and contributor to esoteric religious science. My labours inthis direction, in regard especially to the productionof ‘ The Perfect Way,’ had attracted the attention ofthe leaders of the Indian Theosophical movement, andit was moreover believed that my special qualificationsas a student of physical science added to certain natural gifts of seership would prove helpful to the conduct and control of the British branch.” VVe neednot feel surprise that at the time she wrote Mrs.Kingsford honestly believed herself to be the realleader of the spiritual revelation beginning to flow
:ss
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
into the world. Considering the beautiful fruits ofher seership given out in the book to which she refers,
and in other writings, our surprise relates rather tothe comparative insignificance of the effect they hadon public thought, than to the expectation she had oftheir ultimate results. If she had been able to com
prehend Theosophy as the greater revelation following the forecast of which she had been the channel,she might have played a magnificently important partin its subsequent development. I am glad to say thatthe sore feelings engendered at the time I have been
dealing with were smoothed over eventually, and we
were quite good friends towards the close of her life,though she never realised the true character of theTheosophical movement. Deeply impressed, as wasquite natural, with the interest of her own touch withhigher wisdom, she could not see other developmentsin their true proportions. At the beginning of theillness which proved her last, I remember she said to
me (or in words to that effect)“ I cannot be going to
die because my work is not yet finished.” She failedto realise that the work in question is far greater thancan be identified with any transient personality.
In the beginning of April, 1884, Colonel Olcottarrived in London, Madame Blavatsky remaining be
hind at Nice and Paris' Colonel Olcott was accom
panied by a young Indian Theosophist, Mohini byname, who became for a time a very conspicuous person in theosophical activities. He was introduced to
us as a chela of the Master K. H. and was made cordially welcome.
The 7th was the occasion of the important meetingof the Society referred to above. It was held at Mr.Finch’s Chambers in Lincoln’s Inn, and its purposewas the election of a new President. Mrs. Kingsford’s attitude as already described had deeply
54
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
offended most of the members. She seems to have
failed to understand the feelings engendered and to
have expected her re-election. Many of the members
wished me to become President but I had taken anactive part in the pamphlet controversy and shrankfrom allowing this to assume the shape of a personalrivalry between Mrs. Kingsford and myself in regardto the Presidency. So I had arranged to nominateMr. Finch for the oflice.
The proceedings at the meeting are imperfectly re
corded in the old minute book, but are fairly freshin my memory. I duly proposed Mr. Finch and Ithink that Mr. Maitland went through the form ofproposing Mrs. Kingsford. Anyhow, when the showof hands was taken (Colonel Olcott being in the chair)the vote was practically unanimous in favour of Mr.Finch. Indeed my impression is that Mr. Maitlandwas the only person present who voted for Mrs.Kingsford, who was present herself and showed nolittle irritation.
Mr. Finch, I should explain, was a barrister whohad been senior wrangler in his time at Cambridge.He was a quiet, earnest student of the occult teach
ing we had so far received, and one of the group thatused to assemble at Miss Arundale’s. He it was,I remember, who first moved in the matter and arranged for the publication of “ Light on the Path.”That little book went through many editions and waslargely expanded with notes and comments by MabelCollins herself. I suppose copies of the first editionstill exist but it is many years since I have seen one.
The excitements of the meeting on the 7th were byno means confined to the circumstances of the election. After this was over I was in the midst of anaddress to the meeting when a disturbance at the doorinterrupted me and in a moment the whole room was
55 »
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
aware that Madame Blavatsky had arrived. I broke
off and went to meet her. A little crowd collected
round her and one of the ladies present actually sank
on her knees before the illustrious visitor, who was
then conducted to the upper end of the room and
formally introduced to the meeting.The minutes relating to this meeting after recording
Madame Blavatsky’s arrival go on as follows :— She“ intimated that if any members would communicateto her any inquiries they might like to make in regardto the meaning of obscure passages in “ Isis Unveiled ” such inquiries would receive attention and
would be made the subject of explanations in the new
version of that book which under the title “The SecretDoctrine ” she proposed to bring out.
“Mr. Myers inquired whether documentary evi
dence could be obtained from India for the service ofthe Psychic Research Society in reference to cases inwhich the astral apparitions of the Mahatmas hadbeen seen at various times and places.
“ Madame Blavatsky called on Mr. Mohini to givesome information on the subject and Mr. Mohini de
scribed the recent appearance of the astral figure ofone of the Mahatmas at the Headquarters of theSociety at Madras.
“ Colonel Olcott expressed the heartiest sympathywith the labours of the Psychic Research Society."
After the meeting was over Madame Blavatsky re
turned with us to Ladbroke Gardens, where she stayedwith us for a week. Colonel Olcott and Mohini moving over to Miss Arundale’s where they remained herguests for a time. At this time however MadameBlavatsky only stayed for the week and then—as Ilearn from my wife’s Diary—returned to Paris. Theweek was a busy one, and visitors flocked to our housein greater numbers than ever. Amongst those con
56
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
stantly coming I ought specially to mention the
Countess Wachtmeister and the two Keightleys, one
of whom especially, Mr. Bertram Keightley, continued for many years to play an important part inall theosophical activities.
57
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
CHAPTER VI
dents except that we made the acquaintance ofan American lady who was for a time very con
spicuous amongst us—Mrs. Holloway—a remarkable
clairvoyant and pupil of the Master K. H. Hercoming from America had been heralded by im
pressive stories concerning her psychic gifts and rela
tionship with the Higher world and we found her an
extremely attractive personality. She was a guest ofMiss Arundale’s in the first instance and in ]une came
over to stay with us. Eventually she became, quiteunintentionally, the cause of some temporary mis
understandings between Miss Arundale and ourselves, but that developed and passed away muchlater. At first while staying with us she was to some
extent a link between ourselves and the Master K. H.Madame Blavatsky returned to London (and to theArundale’s house) at the end of ]une and by degreessome troublesome friction ensued between her andourselves, but in advance of this something muchmore than friction disturbed the course of theosophicalwork in this country, and completely changed the character of our relations with the Psychic ResearchSociety.
The 30th of Iune was the day of the disaster andColonel Olcott its unfortunate author. My wife’sDiary for that date enables me to fix the date and does
more than this for it shows by how narrow a chance
she—my wife——was prevented from doing somethingwhich might, for the time at least, have averted thedisaster. Colonel Olcott had become possessed of an
SOMEmonths passed without noteworthy inci
58
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
3 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
absurd little Indian toy consisting of a figure ofBuddha, and made of tin if I remember rightly,mounted on little wheels. By moving it about itwas supposed to represent some idea connected withthe Buddhic faith, but at best it was a very childishsymbol. When the toy attained a ghastly celebrityit was referred to by Madame Blavatsky as Olcott’s“ Buddha on wheels.” Evidently my wife intendedto warn her about it that she might stop Olcott from
showing it to people who would be alive to the badtaste of it. In her Diary I read:—“I went in theafternoon to Arundale’s to try and speak to the O.L.(short for Old Lady, the long familiar nick-name ofMadame Blavatsky) about Colonel Olcott and his
image of Buddha, but could not get a chance. Mr.Finch, Mother Mary and Dido (another nick-name).In the afternoon Mrs. H. (Mrs. Holloway) told mymother’s fortune out of a tea cup.” So my wife came
away without giving the warning. Had she been ableto do that the O.L. would have forbidden Olcott, whomshe domineered over absolutely, to play any more withhis toy, and the trouble I am about to describe wouldhave been avoided, though probably only put off fora while. As I have said already neither Madame Blavatsky nor Olcott were in tune with people of the kindwho were now taking interest in the theosophicalmovement. Colonel Olcott especially, was out of tunewith them to a deplorable extent, and sooner or laterthis must have given rise to trouble. However, as
events turned out we all went that evening to a meetingof the Psychic Research Society where in the course ofthe proceedings Colonel Olcott got up, uninvited, andmade a speech in his worst style, exhibiting and
making much of his grotesque“ Buddha on wheels.”
Of course he set everybody’s teeth on edge. Madame Blavatsky with her quick psychic perceptions
59
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
felt that something dreadful had happened. As amatter of fact the chill suffered by the PsychicResearch leaders owing to Colonel Olcott’s clumsiness on this occasion led up step by step to the famousHodgson report which denounced Madame Blavatsky
‘as an impostor. I must trace the course of events
more fully as I go on, but the feeling whichengendered among the S.P.R. leaders dislike, however unreasonably, for theosophy, actually took rootin the irritation they felt at Olcott’s behaviour on themelancholy evening just described.
To say that Madame Blavatsky was furious, is togive a mere faint suggestion of her condition.Though neither she nor Colonel Olcott were stayingwith us at this time she insisted on coming back withus after the meeting with Olcott, of course to give free
play to her wrath. We four went into the library.Madame Blavatsky was bleached white from the in
tensity of her feelings. In tones rising even higheras she went on,she denounced her unhappy colleaguein language so violent that I was really afraid it wouldpenetrate the next house, and had to use strong language myself in the attempt to make her slacken offin her fury, with which none the less I could not butsympathise. I do not think Olcott ever understoodthe essence and nature of his offence. He movedabout the room making futile remarks from time totime. “What do you want me to do? ” he asked,“ Do you want me to commit suicide? ”
The biggest conflagrations die out eventually. Atlast our unhappy visitors went away.
Some deadly poisons, even, may be slow in takingeffect. For a time after this sensation just dealt withevents took their usual course. I gave lectures at
various places, and we had large evening receptionsat our own house with addresses from Mohini and
6o
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
others. Mr. Leadbeater was a frequent visitor at thistime. He had made our acquaintance long beforeand joined the Society in I883. He was at that timein clerical costume, being a curate at some parish inHampshire. I warned him that if he came amongstus he would be liable to hear discussions at which a
clergyman might be startled, but he put that difficulty aside, and became at once a frequent visitor.
By a pathetic coincidence just about the time ofOlcott’s unfortunate performance at the S.P.R. meet
ing’the Society was planning a new conversazione inhonour of himself and Madame Blavatsky.
On the evening of the 6th ]uly we had an interviewwith the Master K.H. through Mrs. Holloway. Onthis occasion he actually took possession of her andspoke to us in the first person. Previously she hadmerely a consciousness and repeated whatever he said.I well remember the conversation, through finding itsdate in the Diary. I think the idea was to console usand keep up our spirits in the difficulties then seen tobe impending. And the situation became entangledby a new development of “fury,” according to the
Diary, on the part of the O.L. Outbreaks of the kindbecame so frequent as time went on that my recollections of each are confused, but evidently she hadbecome angrily jealous of the way in whichMrs. Holloway was becoming a link between ourselvesand the Master independently of her. Sheinsisted on Mrs. Holloway leaving us and comingback to the Arundales. And I was disinclined totake an active part in the coming conversazione, whichgave rise to what pretended to be letters to me fromthe Master warning me in almost threatening terms(utterly unlike his usual attitude) not to fail in supporting Madame Blavatsky. I distrusted the bona
fides of the letter at the time and soon became quite
I
61
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
convinced that it was a fabrication by the O.L.She got her way for the time being however.Mrs. Holloway was frightened into obedience and
returned to the Arundales. She had received a
(spurious) letter apparently from K. H. ordering herto remain there, and declaring that we were deceived,
that she was merely a medium and saw falsely.As days went on the situation became worse instead
of better. Letters passed to and fro between ourselves and the Arundales, now pretty completelyunder Madame Blavatsky’s influence. The name and
handwriting of the Master were taken in vain morethan once and I find in my wife’s Diary for the 16th
that we felt “ our theosophical career was approachingits end.” Certainly at this period Madame Blavatskyvery nearly wrecked it.
The following morning Mrs. Holloway called onus and said “ she meant to give up the whole businessin disgust,” but nevertheless allowed events to driftand the O.L. had succeeded for the time in dominating the situation. The conversazione duly took placeon the 21st and the gathering was very large andsocially brilliant. Much against my inclination I hadbeen driven to take part in it
,
and am not surprisedto read in my wife’s Diary that “ Percy did not speakup to his usual level.” This celebration was theclimax of Madame Blavatsky’s success, the result ofdeplorable behaviour on her part at the time, butlooking back upon it in these later years with theknowledge that her great catastrophe was rapidlyapproaching, one is chiefly impressed by the sadnessof it all. Had she only been content to remain quietlyat Adyar, satisfied to know that the great work shehad played such an important part in starting wasgoing on well, the plot which brought about herdownfall would never have been set on foot. To the
62
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
end she would have been crowned with the halo of herfame as a great occultist and magician and enthusiasts
making pilgrimages to visit her in India would neverhave been disillusioned. But she came to Europe tobathe in a flood of adulation and the awful karma ofthat mistake has left her memory for the world at largestained with undeserved disgrace. New generationsof theosophists it is true have arisen in the thirtyyears and more that have elapsed since her downfall,and by the vast majority of these her memory has been
so entirely re-gilded that the investigation and conclusion of the Psychic Research Society respectingher, are simply forgotten or ignored, as in the main
they deserve to be, but it now becomes my task inrecording the actual facts connected with the earlyhistory of the Theosophical Society in this country,to trace the course of the S.P.R. proceedings, whenthe leaders of that society after Colonel Olcott’s fauxpas seem to have grown anxious to shake themselvesfree from theosophical associates liable to bring socialdiscredit upon their undertaking. Already, whilestill friendly, the S.P.R. leaders had in May—amonth before the meeting of ]une 2oth—appointed a
committee “ to investigate the evidence of marvellousphenomena offered by certain members of theTheosophical Society.” The sittings of this committee are not recorded in the published journal of theS.P.R. but were circulated privately. At first the
Committee must have been learning a belief in thebona fides of the phenomena, as the witnessesexamined were Colonel Olcott, myself, Mohini andone or two others, all deeply impressed with beliefthemselves. But before long the records reflect a
changed feeling on the part of the Committee. In thereview of its report published at a later date in the
Proceedings of the Society we read :—“ On the whole
63
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
(though with some serious reserves) it seems undeniable that there is a prima facie case for some part at
least of the claim made which, at the point which the
investigations of the Society for Psychical Researchhave now reached cannot with consistency be ignored.And it seems plain that an actual residence for somemonths in India by some trusted observer is an almost
necessary pre-requisite of any more definite judgment.” As a result of this decision Mr. RichardHodgson proceeded to India in November, 1884, andreturned in April, 1885. .
The results of this visit are mentioned in the
“]ournal” for April, 1885. A note in that issuesays :—“ . . . He is now we believe on his way back.He has already sent home a considerable mass ofdocuments. . . . The additional evidence for the
most part unfavourable to the genuineness of thephenomena, and Mr. Hodgson inclines we believe tothe conclusion that the alleged marvels are altogetherto be attributed to fraud.”
As Mr. Hodgson’s stay in India covered severalmonths it is evident that the original appointment ofthe committee to which he belongs must have been
designed soon after the meeting at which ColonelOlcott spoke, but he seems to have been quite unsuspicious of the feeling which gave rise to it. In theThird Volume of his “ Old Diary Leaves ” he makesno mention of the stormy scene with MadameBlavatsky, though his narrative covers the period, butshows an almost pathetic unconsciousness of thechange of feeling on the part of the S.P.R. leaderswhich led to the important change in their attitude.
He writes :—“There had been the making ofacquaintance between us and the S.P.R., entire
cordiality and unsuspicious friendship on our part:an equally apparent sympathy on theirs, agreeable
64
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
social meetings at the houses of their leaders and
finally a consent on my part to be examined by a
committee of the S.P.R. The sky was purely bluewithout the tiniest cloud to indicate the hurricane in
preparation for us.”A general meeting of the S.P.R. (of which I, and
many of my Theosophical friends had already become
members), was held on the 29th of May, 1885, andMr. Hodgson was present on that occasion. His fullreport on the results of his mission to India was not
yet published, but he gave the meeting a summary ofhis conclusions, which were broadly to the effect “ thatthe theosophical phenomena formed part of a systemof fraud worked by Madame Blavatsky with the
assistance of the Coulombs and several other confederates and that none of the phenomena were
genuine.”I was myself abroad at the time but an animated
discussion followed, and soon after the famous Reportmade its appearance. This voluminous document isconcerned with lines of inquiry and especially withcertain letters ostensibly addressed by MadameBlavatsky to Madame Coulomb (some of them toM. Coulomb) who gave them (or sold them) to the“Madras Christian College Magazine.” They werepublished in the issue of that periodical for September, 1884. If they were really written by MadameBlavatsky they proved beyond question that she wasguilty of arranging with M. and Madame Coulombfor the production of sham phenomena. The handwriting was declared by experts to be that of MadameBlavatsky. She declared that they were forgeries asfar as their incriminating passages were concerned.Mr. Hodgson’s report also goes at length intothe history of, and allegations concerning, the socalled “Shrine” to which‘ I made some reference
55 E
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
whe’n dealing with the visit my wife and I paid to
FAdyar on our way home from India. The report also
discusses statements by myself in the evidence I gaveto the S.P.R. Committee and in my book “TheOccult World," and goes on to deal with statements
made by other writers with reference to their
experiences of occult phenomena.To criticise the report in detail would burden this
narrative with a separate volume devoted to that task.At the time of its publication it gave rise to floods ofcontroversy. I answered those parts of it whichrelated to my own writings and statements in apamphlet still available for reference. This wasentitled “The Occult WVorld Phenomena and theSociety for Psychical Research.” It provoked counterreplies from Mr. Hodgson and the final result was toleave opinion on the whole subject sharply divided.Theosophists in general accepted Madame Blavatsky’s assurance that the letters were partly forgeries,and laughed at the conclusions of Mr. Hodgson basedon hypotheses to the effect that unlimited skill inorganising conjuring devices and in legerdemainmight account for some of the phenomena. Theleaders of the S.P.R. on the other hand acceptedMr. Hodgson’s view of these as final, and the originalcommittee of May, 1884, commenting on his report,conclude by saying :—“ For our own part we regardher (Madame Blavatsky) neither as the mouthpiece ofhidden seers nor as a mere vulgar adventuress; wethink that she has achieved a title to permanentremembrance as one of the most accomplished,ingenious and interesting impostors in history.”
Writing now in 1918, more than thirty years afterthe stormy controversy that raged round the Hodgsonreport, I realise how profound was the misunderstanding which distinguished that controversy on both
66
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
sides at the time. No true pen portrait of that marvellously diversified personality we called MadameBlavatsky has ever yet been published. I cannot even
claim that what I am about to say is an exhaustivelycomplete portrait. To frame anything approximatelyresembling such a portrait would involve the acceptance as plain matters of fact, of mysterious possibilities in human life that none but those deeplyengaged in super-physical study would be able to com
prehend. I am engaged in writing a history of the external events connected with the origin and progress ofthe Theosophical Society, and not at this moment, withthe occult science of life, of incarnate and supercarnate consciousness, of obsession, psychic faculty,and the complexities of the struggle about belief inthe .spiritual representation of good and evil, or inother words between Divine and Satanic agencies.But leaving that whole range of thought entirely outof account and contemplating Madame Blavatsky’sdoings on the ordinary plane of physical life, we whoknew her best were most bewildered by the extraordinary contrasts of her behaviour at differentperiods. In connexion with occult phenomena the
experiences I have partly recorded in “The OccultWorld” made me absolutely sure that she possessed
powers over matter entirely eclipsing those possessed
by ordinary mankind, no matter how deeply versedin science. But in process of time I became equallycertain that she sometimes stooped to simple cheatingin such matters. That is how Mr. Hodgson came to
be so grievously misled. That she sometimes em
ployed the Coulombs, husband and wife, as confederates in trickery is the painful though hardlyintelligible state of the facts. Even with me she has
done this. For example on my return to India after
having published “The Occult World,”—after she
61
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
knew that I was rooted in a personal conviction not
only that she possessed magic powers, but that I wasin touch with the Masters and devoted to the
theosophical cause, she employed M. Coulomb to
drop a letter from the Master intended for me througha crack in the rafters above, trying to make me
believe that it had been dropped by the Master himself—materialised then and there after transmission by occult means from Tibet. M. Coulomb toldMr. Hodgson that he had been so employed on thisoccasion, and his statement fits in with the minorcircumstances of the incident. I have no doubt inthe matter.
For the benefit of those among my readers whomay be able partially to understand the intricacies ofsuper-physical life, I may here give what I havereason to believe is Madame Blavatsky’s interpretaiion of this ridiculous incident. She herself—the realigo—was away out of the body at the time, and shead neglected to take measures which lay within her
:)ower, to prevent the intrusion of alien personalities.In this way her body was actually being run at thetime by an evil entity, who designed the sham
phenomenon to bring discredit on her and possibly to
disgust myself. At the first blush this may seem anexplanation of what occurred but no excuse. Herneglect to take proper precautions against suchintrusion seems unpardonable. On the other handshe was at this time and very often, conscious, "viii herpsychic faculties, of the storm of force raging aroundher; black attacks being incessant, and the WhiteLodge resisting them In this whirlwind of contending forces she was in a measure to be excused forsometimes losing her head—to use a familiar andfairly appropriate phrase.
In the course of the Hodgson controversy one of
68
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
the S.P.R. writers remarks that no one who really
possessed the wonderful powers imputed to Madame
Blavatsky could ever stoop to commonplace fraud.
Madame Blavatsky certainly had done this sometimes,
therefore she could not have been a real magician.Hence all her doings must have been fraudulent.
Q.E.D. The psychology of the argument is at fault.
Madame Blavatsky behaved as though at one time she
were one person; at another, another! One cannot
explain her by any commonplace process of reason
mg.If Mr. Hodgson had not conclusively ascertained
that she sometimes cheated, he could never have
satisfied his own mind with the extravagantlyimprobable hypotheses, involving conjuring apparatus and sleight of hand, which he invoked to discreditwhat were really genuine phenomena. Nobody couldarrive at sound conclusions about her by collectingevidence about her. Only by the extreme intimacywith her that my wife and I acquired during her
frequent and protracted visits to us at Allahabad andSimla, and afterwards by painful experiences of herbehaviour in London, in 1884 and 5 could we havereached that understanding of her complex naturewhich made us remain her champions through the
S.P.R. attack and ultimately disgusted us to thatextent that her blind devotees grew cold to us in turn.
In further elucidation of the painful truth thatMadame Blavatsky would sometimes stoop to trickeryeven when circumstances did not involve any real
temptation to do so, I must here record an incident
antedating by a few months the publication of theHodgson report and not provoked in any way by that
report. From the Society’s minute book I find thatat a meeting held in Iuly, 1884, the President (thenMr. Finch) announced with regret, that Mr. C. C.
69
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Massey had resigned his membership of theTheosophical Society. He explained his reasonsto me at the time, and I find a record ofthem in the “Proceedings” of the S.P.R.(page 397, Vol. III.). In 1879 when MadameBlavatsky passed through London on her -wayto India he urgently represented to her the desirehe felt for proof of the existence of the Adepts. Lateron, after Madame Blavatsky had reached India he
found in the Minute book of the Society a letteraddressed to him and purporting to come from one ofthe Adept Brothers. At the time he fully believedthat the letter had been deposited where he found itby the writer and by occult means. Later on againhe was shown a letter that had been addressed byMadame Blavatsky from India to a member of theSociety—well known to be a medium. This letter andothers relating to the same subject, are given in fullin the “ Proceedings,” but are too long for entirequotation here. In the first Madame Blavatsky encloses the letter from the Brother and begs her friendthe medium to convey it somehow in a mysteriousmanner to Mr. Massey. “ Put it into M’s pocket orin some other still more mysterious place.” Warnings follow to the effect that the lady addressed mustbe careful that Massey should not suspect either heror her husband (referred to by an initial in thepublished letter, but Massey told me who was meant)of complicity in the disposal of the letter. Massey wasdeeply disgusted but brooded over the incident forsome time without speaking of it. Ultimately hewrote to Madame Blavatsky on the subject, andreceived a long letter from her in reply (printed in the“ Proceedings ”). She admits that she planned thearrangement described, but asserts that the letter fromthe Master was genuine, so what did the rest matter!
70
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
“ That I saw nothing in it then as I do not see nowof so dreadful is only a proof that I have not received
my education in London and that our notions of the
honourable and dishonourable differ.”That Mr. Massey should have allowed his dis
illusionment concerning Madame Blavatsky to drivehim into his resignation from the Society is greatlyto be deplored. Madame Blavatsky’s shortcomingsor defects of character did not alter the fact that
through her intermediation the Veil had been lifted
(more or less) from the Occult World previously so
totally concealed from view—so far as the world at
large was concerned. My wife and I had long been
alive to her strangely diversified nature but hadattained to a condition of mind and knowledge thatenabled us to look behind her at those who for wantof a better agent had accepted her with all her dis
qualifications, as the intermediary who should maketheir existence known to us. Later on, as far as wewere concerned intermediaries of a more satisfactoryorder took on the work but none of them would havebeen able to do what Madame Blavatsky did in the
beginning.‘As the great movement spread, a great many
people have continually asked—why did the Mastersselect such an unsatisfactory representative as
Madame Blavatsky? It is only fair in the same
breath to recognise that a great many also, impressedby the fine elements in her character, look upon herstill with a feeling resembling worship, but the
answer to the question put by those who were not
thus impressed, is simply that—no better intermediarycould be found. Certain qualifications were essen
tial. The person needed to be personally acquaintedwith some of the Masters in order to be a link betweenthem and the outer world. He or she had to be pos
7r .
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
sessed of psychic faculties that would keep him or herin touch with the Masters wherever he or she mightbe in the outer world. And absolute loyalty to theDivine Hierarchy was a sine qua non. Furthermorethe person required must have powers, as well as
faculty that would meet the emergencies foreseen.To find all these qualifications united was no easytask. I have learned in later years that a search allover the world failed to find them combined in anyEgo willing to undertake the work—except in thecase of the Ego known to us as Madame Blavatsky.In her case they were unhappily combined withcharacteristics sadly out of tune with those of theloftier order, so that——-as I often used to tell her—shewould go about doing good, and undoing 9o per cent.of it by some deplorable blundering. I have some
times looked back at my own theosophical career,
wondering how, in view of our intimacy with MadameBlavatsky, my wife and I were not thrown off therails at an early stage altogether, as this grievouslyhappened in the case of C. C. Massey. :’u'Q/H.vi/H:4*
We were sorely tried by an incident that precededthe exposure of the Hodgson report by a few months.Our intimacy with the Gebhard family at Elberfeldhad ripened very pleasantly. Some of them hadvisited London making the acquaintance of MadameBlavatsky, the Arundales, Mrs. Holloway, and othersof the central theosophical group, and quite a
large party, including Madame Blavatsky andMrs. Holloway, were invited to stay at Elberfeld forthe August holiday time of 1884. It had becomealmost a matter of course that we, my wife and I,should visit Elberfeld during the continental tourwith which at this period we indulged ourselves each
year. Much to our surprise and deeply to her owndistress, Mrs. Gebhard had on this occasion to
72
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
inform us that Madame Blavatsky had given ordersthat we were not to be invited that year. 'At thisperiod Madame Blavatsky was staying with the
Arundales, who were among those whom her powerful personality had most completely conquered. Ineed not attempt to analyse the motives that made
Madame Blavatsky desirous of keeping us away fromthe Gebhards during her visit. They may easily be
guessed. We were somewhat annoyed but not to anyextent that prevented us from enjoying a tour inSwitzerland. Towards the close of this we got a
telegram ffom Mrs. Holloway at Elberfeld beggingus to come on there after all. We did not feel at alldisposed to do so under the circumstances and repliedaccordingly. Telegrams poured in upon us bothfrom Mrs. Holloway and Mrs. Gebhard. We wereassured they were acting by the Master’s wish in
begging us to come. Ultimately we gave way anddid so. A curious situation had developed, though Inever could understand it fully. Madame BlavatskyI gathered had been in one of her very worst moods,and must have somehow got into disgrace with the
higher powers, for the Masters sent communicationsover her head, without her knowledge, through Mrs.Holloway, whose psychic condition enabled themto deal with her in this way. A letter for me quitewithout Madame Blavatsky’s knowledge had comethis way, and it showed that I was definitely wanted,though it failed to clear up the situation fully. Iimagine that Madame Blavatsky had somehow come
under the bad influences that sometimes prevailedwith her (through her own careless neglect of precautions that would have guarded against them) andthat my presence might obviate some risks, but, as
I have said, the entanglement remained obscure.
Anyhow Madame Blavatsky had certainly out
73
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
stayed her welcome, and when, a day or two after ourarrival she, accompanied by Mrs. Holloway andescorted by Rudolph, one of the Gebhard sons, leftus on her way to Flushing, an atmosphere of greatrelief pervaded the house, and was associated withone amusing incident. Accompanying Mrs. Gebhardwe went over the deserted guest rooms after theO.L.’s departure. To our surprise we found in herroom (left in rather a terrible state of disorder) a goodsized despatch box belonging to her that had been
forgotten. We then were convulsed with laughter inthinking of the storm the O.L. would make when shediscovered what had been forgotten. Mrs. Gebhardexercised heroic self-control in refraining from anexamination of the contents of that despatch box.By this time she was gravely suspicious of the O.L.’sbona fides. She took a reasonable view of the situation. For many reasons she, like ourselves, knewhat the mighty fraternity we now call “ The White
Lodge ” was really behind the Theosophical Society,.-ind that Madame Blavatsky was their agent. But hershortcomings as their agent had become painfullyapparent. She certainly was to be suspected of playing tricks, of using Tibetan envelopes, of which shewas suspected of keeping a store, to cover letters“from the Master ”
really written by herself. Anyhow I am glad to say, the despatch box was leftuntouched.
The morning wore away, and we with Mrs.Gebhard were sitting at lunch when the door openedand Rudolph entered with a solemn smile full ofmeaning that we appreciated. “If you think,” hesaid, with a keen sense of the humorous aspect ofthe situation, “that we are going on any furtherwithout that box, you are quite mistaken.” It seemed
that the box had been missed in the train. Measures
74
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
had to be taken instantly or sooner. At the first available station Madame Blavatsky insisted on their allgetting out. She and Mrs. Holloway would waitthere at the station. Rudolph must return to Elberfeld and retrieve the missing box. He and Mrs.Holloway submitted. Olcott, luckily for him, was noton the scene. If he had been he would certainly havehad a rough time, but he, Mohini, and BertramKeightley, who had all been of the Elberfeld party
(distributed among the houses of the Gebhard family)had gone away—for London and Paris—two dayspreviously. I do not remember to have heard howlong the journey to Flushing actually took.
By this time a German Lodge of the T.S. had been
set on foot, under Gebhard auspices, and Dr. HiibbeSchleiden was its President, and remained so Ibelieve for many years; but it would be hopeless forme to attempt to trace the course of the Society’sevolution beyond the limits of this country in whichI have been personally cognisant of its progress.
75
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
CHAPTER VII
NOW I must revert to the period antedating the
appearance of the Hodgson report On ourreturn to London we found Madame
Blavatsky re-established at the Arundales, but she
was preparing for a return to India. We gave an
evening reception in her honour as a farewell com
pliment. News of the attack made upon her at
Madras by the “Christian College Magazine” was
already floating about London and was beginning to
take effect with the S.P.R. people, but was looked
upon as a nefarious plot by the Theosophical group—
many of whom assembled at Euston Square on the
Ist of November to see H. P. B. off on her way to
Liverpool en route to India. She was accompanied,amongst others, by Mr.'Leadbeater, who had cometo the conclusion that he would get on along the Pathby going to India and putting his further services at
the disposal of H. P. B. and Colonel Olcott.The next few months, so far as we in England
were concerned, gave no indication, on the surface ofevents, of the approaching storm. The meetings ofour inner study group went off pleasantly, and on twooccasions, in December and ]anuary, we held openmeetings to include the friends of the members, in a
large room or hall at Queen Anne’s Mansions.These were crowded and brilliant gatherings. Thegrowing antagonism of the S.P.R. had not yet permeated society at large, and the wave of interest inthe Theosophical development, seemed increasing inamplitude. The storm centre had accompaniedMadame Blavatsky to India and I must turn toColonel Olcott’s “ Diary Leaves ” to trace its furthercourse there.
76
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Madame Blavatsky on her return to India inDecember came fully resolved to prosecute the
Coulombs and the Missionaries in reference to the
articles in the “Christian College Magazine.” Onher way back she had picked up information at Cairo,
(Where the Coulombs had formerly kept an hotel),much to their discredit, and imagined that this wouldensure her a victory in the law courts. Colonel Olcottappears to have thought differently: insisted on
waiting till the approaching Convention should meet
when a special committee could consider the matterand decide on a course of action. I-Ie writes :—“ Shefretted and stormed and insisted, but I would not stirfrom my position, and when she threatened to go byherself and ‘ wipe the stain off her character ’ I saidthat I should in that case resign my oflice and let
the Convention decide between us. . . . She then
yielded.” Soon afterwards the proposed Committeewas duly formed and decided against legal proceedings as the publication of the letters was “only a
pretext to injure the cause of Theosophy.” It washeld that the letters would “
necessarily appear absurdto those who are acquainted with our philosophy andfacts, and those who are not acquainted with thosefacts could not have their opinion changed even by a
judicial verdict given in favour of Madame Blavatsky.”* The argument is not very convincing but nodoubt it was wise to abstain from the course MadameBlavatsky proposed to take. It could only have ledto an unfavourable result. Madame Blavatsky cer
tainly always maintained that the letters were forgeries, as regards their incriminating passages, butshe had no means of proving this, and the letters
seemed to.be obviously in her handwriting. To thisday the mystery remains unsolved—except for those
*' Om) Dmnx LEAVES, vol iii, p 192
77
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
who rely on clairvoyant testimony which is in Madame Blavatsky’s favour.
Her‘ friends soon began to be seriously alarmed forher safety. She might abstain from legal proceedingsherself but might be the object of legal attack byothers. The Coulomb party—those who representedthe “ Christian College Magazine ”—were eager to be
prosecuted, feeling sure with good reason no doubt,that they would secure a sensational victory. At theConvention “ one fact,” writes Colonel Olcott, “ re
ported confidentially by a very respected colleague ofours made a deep impression on the minds of theCommittee. He had overheard a conversation between two influential Madras civilians about MadameBlavatsky and the charges against her. In reply toa question by one of them as to what would be likelyto happen, the other said, ‘ I hope she will bring anaction for who must try it
, is determined togive the greatest latitude for cross-examination so thatthis damned fraud my be shown up, and it is not atall impossible that she may be sent to the AndamanIslands.”*
Disappointed in their hopes that Madame Blavatsky would bring an action, the hostile party endeavoured to get the case before the Courts in anotherway. They caused Madame Coulomb to begin anaction for libel against General Morgan—oneof Madame Blavatsky’s European friends—intending to call Madame Blavatsky as a witness and so get her under the desired crossexamination. The situation was undoubtedly serious.Her health was made the ostensible motive forarranging her return to Europe. The lady doctor who
attended her gave a certificate to the effect that theexcitement and worry to which she was exposed in
* 01.D DIARY LEAVES, vol iii, pp 194-6
78
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Madras rendered her departure necessary and she washustled off at very short notice, accompanied by a
maid and herdoctor, and put on board a Messageriessteamer bound for Naples. In her absence the action
against General Morgan lost its motive and was
dropped.She arrived in Naples some time in April, 1885,
and went to a hotel at Torre del Greco, near by.From there she wrote my wife a long letter in a verygloomy vein. This period may be regarded as the
climax of her trouble in connexion with the Hodgsonreport. Of course, as I have said, the report was
grossly unfair in many ways, and actually stupid inmuch of its reasoning, but the world at large took itat its face value, and at first Madame Blavatsky failedto realise how strong a body of adherents she retainedin spite of the conclusions reached by the S.P.R.
The long letter is still in my possession togetherwith a large number of others written most of them
from Wurzburg, whither she went on from Torre DelGreco. Her industry with the pen, whether writingfor the press or for private correspondence, was marvellous. Without reproducing it in extenso I willquote from it enough to show the characteristic attitude of mind in which she confronted the Hodgsonattack and its reception by the S.P.R.
“Do not fight for me, my kind dI- Mrs. Sinnett, donot defend me. You will lose your time and only be
called a confederate if not worse. You would hurtyourself, perhaps the Cause and do me no good. Theiron has entered too deeply into the hapless individualknown as H.P.B. The chemicals used for the Dyeof slander were, or rather are too strong and deathherself, I am afraid, shall never wash away in the
eyes of those who do not know me the dirt that hasbeen thrown at and has stuck on the personality of
79
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
the‘ dear Old Lady.’ Ah yes! the Old Lady is a
clean thing to look at now, an honour to her friendsan ornament to the Society, if anything. Alone the‘ Occult World’ has the key to the situation and the
truth. But the Occult World is at a discount noweven at the Headquarters. The poor Colonel has itsecurely locked up for the present under a triple keyat the very bottom of his poor weak heart, and does
not for the time being have it on his tongue. A re
action and an exaggeration with him as usual. Hehas stuffed the S.P.R. with what could not but appearto the majority cock and bull stories and had fightswith me for asking him not to take them as arbitrators,not to have anything to do with the Dons, and nowwhen their arbitration had such a glorious end for ushe got frightened out of his wits.”
A good deal more follows to the same effect togetherwith a reference to the occasion I have fully dealt withwhen Colonel Olcott “ thrust the Lord Buddha on hiswheels before the intuitional gathering at the PsychicResearch meeting.” The letter then reverts to the
public attitude of mind about herself .
“ Of course you all who believe and respect the Masters cannot without losing every belief in them thinkme guilty. Those who feel no discrepancy in the ideaof filthy lying and fraud.—even for the good of the
cause—being associated with work done for the Masters are congenital idiots. One capable of believingthat such pure and holy hands can touch and handlewith no sense of squeamishness such a filthy instrument as I am now represented to be—are natural bornfools or capable themselves of working on the principle that ‘the end justifies the means’ . . . .
Had I written even one of those idiotic and at bottominfamous interpolations now made to appear in thesaid letter; had I been guilty once only of a deliberate
80
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
purposely concocted fraud, especially when those deceived were my best, niy truest friends—'no love forsuch a one as I. At best but pity or eternal contempt. . . . Many are the thingsl have been
obliged to conceal by holding my tongue—many although fewer those I have allowed to go uncorrectedbefore the world and the belief of my friends, butthese were no phenomena of ours but only the mistakes and hallucinations, the exaggerations of otherpeople quite sincere too. And if I did so it was onlybecause I was ever afraid of injuring the cause.”
These quotations do not amount to more than a
fourth part of the whole letter, but the rest is mainlyan amplification of the parts quoted. The bitter language directed against Olcott was, of course, the ex
pression of a transient feeling, and must not be re
garded as representing her final opinion. Dealingwith the period in his “Diary Leaves ” Olcott de
scribes her as "chafing like a caged lioness ” and
“ upbraiding” him in letter after letter “for whatshe called our cowardice, and our haste to sacrifice heras our scape-goat. She was utterly wrong of course,but argumentation was useless—I was called all the
harsh names conceivable.”She was especially exasperated by some changes in
the form of the magazine “The Theosophist,” theidea of which she had misapprehended at first. Whenthe new issue reached her, Olcott writes :— “ She thenwrote—‘ Well, I knew that the accusation of yourtaking off my name from the Theosophist was allbosh. . . . Let us forgive each other, be indulgent to each other’s failings and cease fighting and
backbiting like Christian sectarians.’ ” Consideringhow one-sided the “ backbiting ” had been, the loftytone adopted is sufficiently amusing."
* OLD DIARY LnvEe, vol. iii, p 312 et seq.
81 F
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Before the actual publication of the Hodgson reportthe activities of the London Lodge were hardlychecked. Open meetings were several times held at
Queen Anne’s Mansions and that of March 4th, 1885,
is referred to in my wife’s Diary as having been veryfully attended, but although the Minute book continues to record the names of new members joiningthe Society it also begun to include ominous hints inthe shape of resignations. These became more numerous as time goes on, but are balanced by theelection of many new members. The proceedings ofthe Lodge at its closed meetings (distinguished fromthe open meetings held at Queen Anne’s Mansions)were largely concerned with discussion arising fromthe Hodgson Report—when that at last was published—and with some trouble that ensued from chargesagainst Mr. Mohini. Clouds were settling down onthe London Society and its meetings became less frequent than previously. Nevertheless we took a roomon the first floor of No. 15, York Street, Covent Garden, to be permanently available for the use of mem
bers and collected a few books there. The groundfloor was occupied by the shop and office of Mr. Redway, a publisher in a small way of business whom Iat that time in possession of means-—subsidised witha view of stimulating his attention to publications ofa theosophical character. But nothing could ef
fectually check the distintegration of the Society whenthe Hodgson report gave the general public theimpression that the whole theosophical movement wassomehow a fraudulent enterprise on the part of Madame Blavatsky. A small group around ourselvesremained untouched by the unpleasant influence ofthe Report, but for a time we had to abandon all hopeof progress and could only mark time.
82
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
CHAPTER VIII
MADAMEBlavatsky only stayed a few months
at Torre Del Greco and then went on toWurzburg. She was never left alone, and
her principal reliance during the period that followed,was on the Countess Wachtmeister, whose devotedcare of her never slackened. My wife and I went tosee her at Wurzburg in the course of our autumn tourin 1885. She was staying at 6, Ludwigstrasse. We,of course, went to a hotel though after a day or two
my wife went to stay with the O.L. at Ludwigstrassewhile I engaged a single room for myself somewhereelse. Madame Fadeef (Madame Blavatsky’s aunt) wasstaying with her at the time and also “ the Solovioffs ”
—as I find from the Diary. The O.L. then regardedSolovioif as a friend, though he turned into an enemylater on. Considering what her psychic facultieswere in some ways, Madame Blavatsky in a greatmany cases showed herself a deplorably bad judge ofcharacter—both ways.
During our visit to Wurzburg I had to get from her,
as well as I could, explanations that would clear upinconsistencies in various stories of her adventurouslife that she had told us from time to time in the interests of the book, then in preparation, which ultimately appeared under the title “ Incidents in the Lifeof Mme. Blavatsky.“ Much correspondence on thisproject had already preceded our visit. She was eagerthat I should do something in her defence when the
Hodgson report appeared. The only practical courseI could take seemed the publication of her Memoirs.We had long been vaguely assuming that after her
* 2nd Edition—T.P.H.
83
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
death, whenever that might take place, I should write
her Memoirs and I had suggested that by doing thisin advance I might effectually dispose of the absurd
idea that she was an adventuress concocting the whole
theosophical enterprise for her own personal advan
tage. I could easily obtain from her Russian relations guarantees concerning her birth and social position. In consultation we decided that “ Memoirs ”
would be too comprehensive a title for the book and
agreed on the word “Incidents ” instead. But thetrouble was that in our long intimacy she had told usinnumerable tales of adventure which I now had to
try and fit in with one another in a connected series,with some attention to time and place. They wouldnot fit. Directly I began to handle dates the difficulties became desperate. She had originally told us,when she first made our acquaintance at Allahabad,that she had spent three years with the Masters inTibet; other episodes taken into account, no threeyears could anyhow be identified as those so spent. Ihad good reason to feel sure that she really had been-—
at some period—with the Masters in Tibet, but eventually the three years became condensed into abouteleven months. So on with other dates, and mywife’s Diary makes mention of days spent with Mme.Blavatsky during our Wurzburg visit in trying toclear up the confusion.
I find in a box full of her letters from Wurzburgone which relates to the “ Incidents ” and exhibits herattitude of mind towards ourselves, which was perfectly sincere, I feel sure, at the moment, though laterevents put a totally different complexion upon it. Shewrote :—
Mv DEAREST MR. SINNETT,May They bless and reward you—I can only feel
as deeply as it is in my nature to feel that you are
84
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
the best friends I have left in the world and that youmay dispose of me to the hour of my death.
Do whatever you like. Publish the Memoirs, writewhat you think best and proper. I subscribe to itbeforehand and hereby give you carte blanche and fullauthority to act and do in my name whatever you will.I am sure you will defend the cause and myself betterthan I ever can.
[After going on at some length with indignant protests against being taken for a Russian spy, she windsup by saying she is making her will.]
“I want you to take care of my papers and of a
box on which I will write your name. It containsall the Mahatma papers and many letters I have re
ceived from Mahatma K. H., orders from Master,blowing up, and so on. I hope they will fall in noone’s hands but yours. Publish, write, tell me whatto do and I will do so. I am a paralysed body—deadheart and body. I have lost the faculty of sufferingeven.
Yours to the last,H. P. BLAVATSKY.
I never heard any more of the box- in question orof the will and, though at the time she was alwayshinting at the probability of an early death, six moreyears of life lay before her during which her Wurzburg attitude of mind underwent considerablechanges. Even as regards the “ Incidents ” she grewmore than dissatisfied. As its purpose in accordancewith her wish had been to dissipate the suspicion thatshe was a Russian spy I had emphasized the loyaltone she really had always adopted in speaking to
Indian natives about the British rule. She warnedthem of the folly of wishing to exchange this for Russian rule, which she plainly told them would be a dismal change for the worse. When the book was pub
!)
35
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
lished her Russian relations were deeply offended withher for taking this tone. Her sister, Mme. ]elihovsky, was staying with her at Ostend, and no doubttook her to task on the subject to her great annoyance. Anyhow she generally afterwards referred to
my book as “those damned Memoirs.” As I had
only written it at her earnest desire this was a somewhat ludicrous result, but it will be unnecessary forme to refer to the matter again.
All through the spring of 1886 my wife and I continued to keep the Society alive and our house at Ladbroke Gardens continued the centre of a great deal ofsocial activity—though the prestige of the movementhad been severely shaken. The Minutes of the Society at this period refer to attacks on the Society inthe Sunday Times and the World directed especiallyagainst Mr. Mohini, whose relations with a certain
lady gave rise to some legal proceedings that gave usgreat annoyance at the time but proved abortive inthe end. None the less we were enabled to holdanother open meeting at Queen Anne’s Mansions onthe 30th ]une which, I see from my wife’s Diary, waslargely attended. The ordinary meetings meanwhilewere almost suspended during the following few
years. The last entry in the Minute Book records a
meeting held in ]anuary, 1893, but by that time themovement in this country had attained an entirely new
aspect, as I must now endeavour to explain.Early in 1886 Mme. Blavatsky migrated from
Wurzburg to Ostende under the guidance and withthe help of the Gebhard family. Mrs. Gebhard had
long before this, got over her distrust of the“ O.L.”
as engendered by the visit to Elberfeld which I havedescribed. I visited her at Ostende in August, I886,and found her very busy writing the Secret Doctrineon which work she had been engaged during the
86
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
greater part of her stay at Wurzburg. I have no
recollections of special interest in connexion with thisvisit, except that I met Mme. jelihovsky, Mme. Blavatsky’s sister, who afterwards I think had a gooddeal to do with the widening of the breach between
Mme. Blavatsky and myself. B_iit the visit, lookingback on it from a later period, may be regarded as
the last stage of Mme. Blavatsky’s close attachment toand reliance on ourselves. Soon afterwards she wasbrought over to London and a new era dawned for theTheosophical Movement in England.
A group of the London Lodge members, of whichthe two Keightleys and Mr. Harbottle were especiallyactive in the matter, had conceived the idea of invitingMme. Blavatsky to return to London. Although the
ultimate results as regards the progress of the movement were important and beneficial I did not welcomethe idea at the time. Deeply impressed by the disasters that had ensued from her return in 1884, I shrankfrom the possibility that her presence might give rise,in some way, to further trouble. The Keightleys consulted me on the subject, but were not turned fromtheir purpose by my disapproval. We had a specialconference on the proposed invitation—taking therespectful form of a “petition ” to Mme. Blavatskyat the house where Mr. Archibald Keightley was thenliving in Elgin Crescent, and my reluctance to join inwith it began to create an estrangement between myself and its promoters. Thus I have no personalknowledge of the arrangements made for carrying outthe plan. I believe that some of the group concernedwent over to Ostende to see Mme. Blavatsky and ob
viously they financed the whole undertaking. Thescheme seems to have hung fire for a little owing to
some temporary illness, but Mme. Blavatsky actuallycame over under careful escort in May, 1887, and was
87
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
established at first in a house at Norwood, Maycot byname, lent to the group in charge of her. The first
reference to the new situation that I find in my wife’sDiary shows that we had news on the 2nd May that
H.P.B. would arrive at Norwood in the afternoon.The following morning I went to see her and my wifewent the following day and had “
nearly three hourswith her.” We both went again, two or three times
during the month, and on the 23rd my wife recordsa visit in the course of which she found the “ O.L.”“very full of the new notion of turning the EnglishTheosophists into groups each under its own President.” The Keightley group had apparently by thistime determined to create a new Lodge to be independent of the London Lodge, till then the only re
cognised Theosophical organisation in Great Britain—the only one in Europe except for the Germanbranch established at Elberfeld. The plan wasquickly carried out and “The Blavatsky Lodge ” as
it was called came into existence. I cannot describethe course of events more minutely as I was not consulted in the matter, but Colonel Olcott’s diary recordsthe receipt of a letter from Mme. Blavatsky dated 25thMay, 1887 (from Maycot), in which she writes :—“ We have fourteen of the best of the members whohave now formed a new Lodge, and, my protests notwithstanding, have called it the Blavatsky Lodge ofthe T.S.”" '
The protests can hardly have been very determinedfor the founders of the new Lodge were too completely devoted to her to have resisted any real wishon her part. In one sense the “ Early Days ” of theSociety, those in which its history was identified withthat of the London Lodge, had come to an end. Anew Theosophical era had ben inaugurated, in which
* Om DIARY LEAVES, vol iv, p 25
88
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
great progress was made, and in which storms ragedfrom time to time in a way that was not unusual inconnexion with activities revolving round H.P.B.One such storm—this time in a tea-cup—had to dowith some trouble that had arisen in Paris in connexion with a branch of the Society established there
by a certain M. Louis Dramard who died soon afterwards. His survivors seem to have disagreed as tothe management of the branch. Madame Blavatskytook the part of one combatant and wrote such excitedletters to India on the subject that the ExecutiveCouncil—Colonel Olcott tells us—“ was alarmed forthe stability of the movement in the West.”* So he
thought it necessary to come himself to Europe, torestore order.
This he seems to have accomplished by issuing a“ charter ” for a new lodge to be independent of thatin which the tea-cup storm had arisen. In doing thishe displeased the disputant whom Madame Blavatskyhad been disposed to patronise and this “led to a
pitched battle between H.P.B. and myself on myreturn to London.” The mutual relations of the“ Founders ” were by no means always so harmoniousas later generations of Theosophists have generallyimagined.
“ Quarrelling ” would hardly be the wordto use in reference to these disagreements, as the angerinvolved was always shown by Madame Blavatsky.Olcott’s tone in writing about such troubles was always good tempered and restrained, as for example,in reference to the formation of the “Esoteric Section ” which Madame Blavatsky designed, as she
practically admitted in conversation at the time, to
neutralise Colonel Olcott’s autocratic supremacy inthe Society.
Colonel Olcott gives a picturesque account in his* Om DIARY Lnxvns, vol iv, p 56
.
89
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
\“ Diary Leaves ” of the ferocious attitude she took upin her correspondence with him in reference to the“ Esoteric Section” set on foot soon after her estab
lishment in comfort at the house in the LansdowneRoad taken for her accommodation by the Keightleygroup. The stay at Norwood had never been re
garded as more than a provisional arrangement. The“Diary Leaves ” will always be available for reference by any of my readers who wish to realise theextent to which the “ Founders ” were sometimes atvariance, so I need only quote a few significant passages. Colonel Olcott writes.—
“ She had hatched out a new section, with herselfelected as President. . . . She writes ‘ Now lookhere, Olcott. It is very painful, most painful, for meto have to put to you what the French call Marché enmain, and to have you choose. You will say againthat you hate threats and these will only make youmore stubborn. But this is no threat at all, but a
fait accompli. It remains with you to either ratify itor go against it
,
and declare war to me and my Esotericists. If, recognising the utmost necessity of thestep you submit to the inexorable evolution of thingsnothing will be changed. Adyar and Europe will remain allies and, to all appearances, the latter will seemto be subject to the former. If you do not ratify it
well, then there will be two Theosophical Societies,the old Indian and the new European, entirely independent o
f each other.’ ”*
The formation of the Esoteric Section as I havesaid was arranged for soon after Madame Blavatsky’sestablishment at Lansdowne Road. The net wasthrown out very widely, and members joined it
,
attracted by the promise of some mysterious teachingnot given to the rank and file of the Theosophical
* OLD DIARY LEAvEs, vol iv, p 55
90
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Society. As persons quite unknown to Madame Blavatsky were taken into it by correspondence, my wifeonce asked her if she really meant to give
“ esoteric ”
teaching to persons whom she did not even personallyknow. “ Oh no,” she replied, or in words to thateffect,
“ I shall only give teaching to the few imme
diately around me.” She did not seem to feel thatthe others were then beguiled into the organisation onfalse pretences. They were required all the same to
give pledges; I find among my papers a draft of these
pledges in a form that appears to have been used inthe beginning, and the most important one binds theapplicant, or “ probationer ” “to support before the
world the Theosophical movement, its leaders and itsmembers, and in particular to obey without cavil ordelay the orders of the Head of the Esoteric Section inall that concerns my relation with the Theosophicalmovement.” The probationer was also required topledge himself “ never to listen without protest to anyevil thing spoken of a brother theosophist and to abstain from condemning others,” and again “ to givewhat support I can to the Theosophical movement intime, money, and work."
I declined participation in the undertaking—thoughoffered personal exemption from all the pledges, ifonly I seemed to accept things—as it sinned, in myopinion, against fundamental principles of Theosophyas I understood it. The breach between Madame Blavatsky and myself then gradually widened.
Colonel Olcott—as the result of his “pitched battle”apparently—consented to issue an “ Order in Council ”—(he was always fond of investing his doings as
President with the dignity of such phrases), “ formingan Esoteric Section with Madame Blavatsky as itsresponsible head.”
QI
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
CHAPTER IX
was published To our surprise we found inits earlier pages an attack on “Esoteric Budd
hism.” I was represented as having misunderstoodthe Master’s letter in reference to the association ofthe planets Mars and Mercury with our Earth in the
planetary chain to which we belong. I had clearlyexplained that they did belong to our chain, Marsbehind us in evolution, Mercury in advance. Butnow Madame Blavatsky declared that this was “ a
great mistake.”I refrain from a minute analysis of the elaborate
attempt to justify her position that Madame Blavatskymakes in the protracted explanation that follows. Itaffords one of the most, or the most, painful examplesof the terribly evil influences under which she some
times fell as a consequence of the confusing war ofhostile and protective powers continually ragingaround her. The letter from the Master from whichshe professed to give extract was not what she represents it
, an answer to enquiries of her own, but a
garbled version of a letter originally addressed to me,a copy of which came into her possession under circumstances deeply to be deplored.
Though printed in the earlier chapters of the“ Secret Doctrine” the whole passage was of courseadded during the Lansdowne Road period when she
was surrounded by impassioned devotees, some ofwhom no doubt resented my reluctance to be one ofthem. On them she threw the whole blame when mywife indignantly addressed her (I forget whether by
THISsame year, 1888, the
“ Secret Doctrine”
92
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
letter or word of mouth) in reference to the attack onme, so comically at variance with her former attitudeof mind when we were almost her only championsduring the Wurzburg period. They had made herwrite as she did l
Our equanimity as regards the accuracy of the
statements made in “ Esoteric Buddhism ”relating to
Mars and Mercury was not in the least disturbed byMadame Blavatsky’s attempted refutation. At this
period and for many later years we were enjoyingopportunities of frequent conversation with the
Master K. H. in a way carefully concealed fromMadame Blavatsky’s knowledge, as well on the
higher plane by the Master’s arrangements as on the
lower by our own scrupulous secrecy on the subject.We had been told that if she came to know of our
private privilege her occult powers would enable herto interfere in a way which would imperil its continuance. Her jealousy of anyone else acting as an
intermediary between the Masters and people on the
physical plane was so intense (it had been productive
of trouble in the case of Mrs. Holloway as I have
shown) that she would hesitate at nothing if her displeasure in this way was roused. Privately the Masterassured us that I had not made any
" mistake ” in thematter dealt with, and although the attack directedagainst me was annoying we must be content withknowing we were really in the right. Thus whilesorely tempted to create an open scandal by disclosingthe true facts about the alleged letter as given in the“ Secret Doctrine ” I did not do so, and even now am
passing lightly over the details of the episode. Theannoyance it gave us increased rather than diminishing as time went on, and as I began to receive letters
from all over the world asking me how I came to be
so stupid as to misunderstand the Master’s teaching,
93.
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
it was not easy to remain silent. Eventually whenMadame Blavatsky had passed away and Mrs. Besant,
by the expansion of her own knowledge had ascertained definitely that Mars and Mercury did belong toour chain with functions in evolution as I hadoriginally described them, she did publish a statementto that effect in “ Lucifer”—the magazine started byMadame Blavatsky and which she, Mrs. Besant,continued to edit under that name for a time.‘
This note may have had the effect of reconcilingsome theosophical students with the true teaching inreference to the planetary chain, but it is not easy tokill falsehood outright when it once gets a good start.Up to the time at which I am/writing (1919) the echoes
of Madame Blavatsky’s attack on my book are stillreverberating. In an American magazine called“ Azoth ” a review of a pamphlet I recently publisheddeplores the fact that I am “ still guilty of the heresywhich H. P. B. condemned of believing that thishumanity came from Mars and is going to Mercury.”
The year 1889 was associated with many events ofimportance in connexion with the growth of the
Society, and at its extreme close with one that led to
very important consequences—the return to Europe ofMr. Leadbeater, accompanied by a Singalese boy,who in later years became a very prominent figure inthe Theosophical world, as C. jinarajadasa. Thestory of his introduction to this country is
,
at the time
I write, unknown to his admirers at large, but is worthrecord here.
When Mr. Leadbeater went to India with MadameBlavatsky he was sent by Colonel Olcott to Ceylon totake charge of certain Buddhist Schools that he,
Colonel Olcott, had established there. Mr. Leadbeater kept up a correspondence with me and many of
* See “LUCIFElt." voi xvii, p 271
94
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
his letters showed plainly that he was very miserablein this uncongenial employment, although, as Ilearned afterwards, the period was associated withgreat development of his psychic faculties and withconsciousness in the physical brain of his relations on
higher planes with the Master K. H.Our son was, in 1889, a boy of 12 years old. The
period was one in which we seemed to be very well off,
in worldly possessions (our total ruin planned by the
black powers came on later). It occurred to us that it
would be better for our son to be educated by a
Theosophical tutor instead of being sent to a common
place school, especially as he was thought to be ofdelicate constitution. Mr. Leadbeater seemed to be
exactly qualified to fit the part. We knew and likedhim personally. We wrote to him offering him the
appointment with us as resident tutor. The gratefulletters he wrote back were touching in their exuberantdelight at the prospect of emancipation from thewretched life he was leading in Ceylon, but there wasa great difliculty in the way! The Master had
specially directed him to take care of a certain nativeboy in whom he—the Master—for reasons of his own,was interested. Leadbeater could not leave Ceylonand come to England without bringing that boy withhim!
Of course this was a most unattractive proposal, butwe came to the conclusion that by falling in with itwe should be helping to realise some plans the Masterhad in view, and after much consideration agreed.My wife and I had gone to Southsea to spendChristmas that year, but a telegram announcedLeadbeater’s arrival in England, and I went back to
town a few days sooner than I intended to meet him.I found him and the Ceylon boy already establishedat our house in Ladbroke Gardens. I may as well deal
95
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
at once with later developments in reference to the
boy. From the beginning he behaved nicely in allways, during the year or two he stayed in our house.
The arrangement was only broken up when our total
ruin, to which I must refer again later, rendered its
continuance impracticable. I contrived eventually to
secure employment for Leadbeater in the London
joffice of the“ Pioneer,” the paper I formerly edited in
jlndia, and “ Raja,” as we called him, grew up in hiscare. In my belief he failed to carry out the astral
plan the Master had in view. This was to let the boyhave the benefit of a Western education, but to lethim return to Ceylon and by joining the Buddhistpriesthood do something to reform that very decadent
body. But Leadbeater grew too much attached to the
boy to carry out this plan. By degrees he became
well known to many of our friends, some of themwilling and in a position to give the pecuniary help he
needed to keep Raja in England and even at a
University. By the time his education was completeand he had emerged from boyhood he had almost
forgotten his native language and regarded the notionof going back to live the ordinary native life in Ceylonwith unconquerable reluctance. So he drifted into thecareer that has made him well known in many parts ofthe world as a theosophical lecturer and writer.
In compiling a narrative of this kind it is almostimpossible to maintain a chronological sequence indealing with events that have to be recorded. Somany separate threads are interwoven with each otherthat in following out each in turn it is necessary to goback to pick up others. The development of theSociety from 1889 onwards was assuming a newcharacter which left that of its early days in the background. Colonel Olcott paid another visit to Europein that year, travelled about England, Scotland and
96
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Ireland and founded many lodges. The “ BritishSection ” was now definitely constituted, and the
London Lodge denuded of many members drawn off
into Madame Blavatsky’s entourage shrank to
relatively small proportions. We made a present to
the British Section of the furniture and books we had
accumulated at the York Street room, and the really
important work we did was carried out at our privatemeetings first at Ladbroke Gardens, and afterwards at
Leinster Gardens, whither we moved in the beginningof 1890. Our financial crisis was approaching, but wecontinued to hold meetings in the evenings of the mostfaithful members of the London Lodge in which the
teaching I—or rather we (my wife and I)—were then
getting from the Master -vifi the private channel ofcommunication that had been available for the previousfive years was talked over and assimilated. Thus Ihad been enabled in 1885 to issue a “ Transaction ”
of the London Lodge on “The Higher Self,” an
expression- which together with the important ideasclinging round it
, was then introduced into Thesosophical literature for the first time. The wholesubject has so long now been a familiar commonplaceof theosophical thinking that it seems strange, looking back, that it should have been received withgrudging distaste by the large circle of devoteesround Madame Blavatsky. But she could nevertolerate the notion of fresh teaching coming throughany channel independent of herself. So she endeavoured to pick holes in the new theory of theHigher Self, resting her objections on the use of theword “ Self "in some Eastern writing as identical withthe Divine principle in all consciousness.
'At this date it seems hardly worth while to followin detail the controversy that ensued. Obedient to thehint that my view of the matter was distasteful to
ll
.
91.°
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Madame Blavatsky, the American publication “ThePath,” conducted by Mr. judge, attacked my pamphlet and, outside the narrow circle of London Lodgestudents, it was for a time regarded as deplorablyheterodox, though by degrees the teaching it passedon came to be regarded as among the familiar and
rudimentary commonplaces of theosophical knowledge, and theosophical students are now so used tothe idea that they will hardly realise that it dawnedupon us first on the occasion I refer to. But in spiteof its truth and simplicity it did not, as I have said,meet with a cordial reception from Madame Blavatsky,who as I have shown in other cases did not readilywelcome occult information coming through otherchannels. Later on, when I endeavoured in a bookcalled “The Rationale of Mesmerism” to interpretsome of the higher phenomena of mesmerism I hadto make use of the information I had acquired inreference to the Higher Self, and cfiticism of the book
emanating from devout followers of MadameBlavatsky denounced the theory as at variance withher teaching. I only refer to the matter now becauseit gives me an opportunity of showing how beautifullymy wife and I were in collaboration in all that concerned our work in the interests of Theosophy. As Ihave said before my wife’s help and sympathy inconnexion with my more conspicuous share in thework was of supreme value throughout the wholeundertaking, but it did not often assume a publicmanifestation. On the occasion I am dealing withhowever, it did. Reviews of my Mesmerism bookappeared in Madame Blavatsky’s magazine “Lucifer”and in Mr. ]udge’s magazine published in America“ The Path ”; my interpretation of some among thesubtle phenomena of Mesmerism involved reference tothe Higher Self and was scornfully dealt with
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
accordingly. My wife took up the defence of myposition and wrote an article for “Lucifer ” ofAugust, I892, so well reasoned and representing suchcareful preparation that I reprint it here in order thatthe reader may realise in some measure her mental
grasp of the teaching it was our task to pass on.After a few introductory words relating to the
reviews of my book she goes on :—“ For some years past there has been a considerable
amount of misapprehension on the subject of the“ Higher Self,” as originally elucidated by Mr.Sinnett in a Transaction of the London Lodge, published in I885. He was the first of the modern writerson Theosophy to make use of that expression; and to
that extent coined the word which has since then been
so much used and misused, to convey his meaning inregard to that particular aspect of the human soul.
The words, the “ Self," the “ Highest Self,” andthe “Supreme,” are to be found in many of theEnglish translations of the Sanskrit writings, more
particularly in the Upanishads, but the expression“ Higher Self,” as a definition of the individualisedEgo, had never, until the publication of theTransaction referred to, been used in recent Occultteaching. At the time of writing the above-mentionedpaper the term “ Higher Self” appeared to Mr.Sinnett to be the best description available of the
re-incarnating principles in their relation to the lowerquaternary, and the reasons for thus using the term
prevail as strongly now as they did then. Thereforein criticizing his present book it would perhaps be
more instructive to the reader, as it would undoubtedlybe fairer to the author, if the reviewer accepted his
meaning, even though objecting to his terminology.It is moreover difficult to understand how the “ HigherSelf,” as spoken of in the Rationale of Mesmerism,
99
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
could be considered as the equivalent of Atma, or theUniversal Spirit, especially when taken in conjunctionwith the two previous Transactions on the subjectwhich are referred to, and consequently may be
supposed to have been read, by the writer of thenotice in The Path.
Madame Blavatsky, in dealing with these twopapers in the Key to Theosophy, does not fall intothis error, but fully appreciates that in speaking of the“ Higher Self” Mr. Sinnett is referring to theSpiritual or re-incarnating Ego, and not to eitherAtma, or Parabrahman, the Divine and UniversalSpirit.
Language and words in themselves are of no valueunless they can be utilised to convey ideas, and in
support of the use of the expression “Higher Self ”
as a suitable definition of the human Spiritual Ego,many quotations taken from writings, ancient andmodern, may be brought forward.
In the English translations of Sanskrit worksmentioned above, Atma, Paramatma, Brahma, or theUniversal Spirit, are almost invariably spoken of as
the “ Self,” the Highest Self or the Supreme, butnever as the “ Higher Self.”~
In Telang’s rendering of the Bhagaoad Gitd we findthese words :—
There are two beings in the world, the destructibleand the indestructible. The destructible (includes)all things. The unconcerned one is (what is) calledthe indestructible. But the being Supreme is yetanother called the Highest Self, who as the inexhaustible lord pervading the three worlds supports
(them) . . .
Davies, in his translation of the same verses, givesthe idea in very similar terms.
In this world there are two existences, the Perish-\able and Imperishable. The Perishable consists of
roo
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
all living things, the Imperishable is called the Lordon high. But there is another, the highest existence,called the Supreme Spirit. . . .
Turning to the Upanishads, in the last section ofthe Mundaka we read .:—
He that knows that Highest Self, becomes thatHighest Self only. There is none in his familyignorant of the Self. He passes beyond misery, he
passes beyond the taint of good and evil works, heis released from his heart’s ties and becomes immortal.
Again :—
. . . And we also know the undecaying Highest Self,the farther shore beyond all fear for those that willto cross the sea of metempsychosis.
Mr. Gough further says :—[Philosophy of the Upanishads]
This Self, this Highest Self, Atman, Brahman,Paramatman, is being, thought, and bliss undifferenced.
Professor M. Muller, in describing the Self, says :—[What Can India Teach Us]
Atman, the Self far more abstract than our Ego—the Self of all things, the Self of the old mythologicalgods . . . the Self in which each individual selfmust find rest, must come to himself, must find hisown true self.
Further on p. 251 :—But that Self, that Highest Self, the Paramfitman,
could be discerned after a severe moral and intellectual discipline only, and those who knew the othergods to be but names or persons . . . knew also thatthose who worshipped these names or persons, worshipped in truth the Highest Self, though ignorantly.
Again p. 253 :.—The Self within (Pratyagatman) was drawn to
wards the Highest Self (the Paramatman); it foundits true Self in the Highest Self, and the oneness ofthe subjective with the objective Self was recognisedas underlying all reality. . . .
IOI
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
These extracts are not given for any intrinsic valuein themselves, although they contain much of theessence of the Vedantin philosophy. For the purposeof illustration, however, they show that Mr. Sinnetthad some authority to go upon, outside of the reasonableness of the wording, in speaking of the individualEgo as
“ Higher Self” in contra-distinction to theHighest. In its capacity as a re-incarnating force itcannot be considered the Highest, although indevelopment it becomes more and more glorified andilluminated by its spiritual aspiration towards thatHighest, and may finally blossom into liberation andunity. Atma as representing pure Spirit should notbe confounded with the divine human Ego, as thelatter, while in a state of differentiation and liable tore-incarnation, must contain the higher fifth principle,of Manas. It is this very individual Self in humanitywhich contains the potential elements of future unitywith the Supreme and Universal Self; and which—sometimes retarded in its upward path of evolution,and sometimes helped onward by the experiencegained through its alliance with its series of personalselves—was appropriately termed by Mr. Sinnett“ The Higher Self.”
Madame Blavatsky, in much that she has written,
appears to support the idea, and in some cases uses
even the same nomenclature. In her comments onStanza V. she says :—
This fire is the Higher Self, the Spiritual Ego, orthat which is eternally re-incarnating under the influence of its lower personal Selves.
[Secret Doctrines, Vol. II. Stanza V.]
Further on in the same chapter :—Unless the Higher Self or Ego gravitates towards
its sun . . .
I02
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
The reader will find all through this commentarythat the writer uses the term Higher Self as the
equivalent of the re-incarnating Ego.Again in her remarks on Stanza X., p. 23o :—
. . . This is the human terrestrial form of Initiates,and also because the Logos is Christos, that principleof our inner nature which develops in us into theSpiritual Ego—the Higher Self—being formed ofthe indissoluble union of Buddi, the sixth, and thespiritual efflorescence of Manas, the fifth principle.
To this is added a footnote :—It is not correct to refer to Christ, as some
Theosophists do—as the sixth principle in man,Buddhi. The latter per se is a passive and latentprinciple, the spiritual vehicle of Atman, inseparablefrom the manifested universal soul. It is only inunion in conjunction with self-consciousness thatBuddhi becomes the Higher Self and the divinediscriminating soul.
Further on in the same volume (ch. XXIII. p. 563) :
Now when the 1Rabbi Jesus is requested (in PistisSophia by his disciples to reveal to them the
mysteries of the Light of thy Father (i.e., of theHigher Self enlightened by Initiation and DivineKnowledge), Jesus answers, . . . etc.
Obviously pure Atman cannot be initiated either inDivine or any other kind of knowledge, therefore theHigher Self here, as in the other quotations, can onlyrefer to the re-incarnating Ego.
One more extract from the same author may be takenout of that most beautiful little book, The Voice of the
Silence (p. 38) :‘—
Restrain by thy Divine thy Lower Self.Restrain by the Eternal the Divine.Aye, great is he who is the slayer of desire.Still greater he in whom the Self Divine has slain the
very knowledge of desire.Guard thou the Lower lest it soil the Higher.
103
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Clearly nothing can soil or pollute pure spirit, or
Atma, and the Higher and Lower alluded to can refer
only to the Higher and Lower Selves.The word “higher” predicates an intermediate
condition between that which is above and that whichis below. If pure spirit, Atma, or the Supreme, is to
be called the Higher Self, where are we to look for
what'must be, if language has any meaning, the
Highest ?
A few words may now be said about some other
points raised in the afore-mentioned notices. Themost important is that which touches upon thequestion as to which of the principles of the sensitivein trance come under the control of the mesmerist.There would certainly be no difference of opinionbetween Mr. Sinnett and his critics in regard to onepoint, and that is, that pure Atma, or pure Spirit,alone does not fall under the power of the operator.If, however, the human Ego is to be described as beingeither the one or the other, then the experience ofMr. Sinnett, or any other Occult student who has hadany practical knowledge concerning the higher aspectsof Mesmerism, will not be in accord with that view.A long and close study of this branch of Occultismgoes to prove most decisively that it is the enormouslyvarying character of the Manas principle in thehuman race, due to greater or less spiritual development and the ever-changing Karmic necessities, whichover and over again find expression in the psychicalforms of incarnation. These variations in the HigherSelf are never more clearly illustrated than when it isset free under the mesmeric trance, whether such be
functioning ofi the astral or spiritual plane. EachEgo under such conditions differs in some strikingway from another under like circumstances, quite asmuch as do their physical bodies in ordinary life.
104
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Moreover, it would be impossible for an operator ofthis pure and more spiritual form of mesmerism to be
deceived as to the state of consciousness of any specialsensitive when in the trance condition. Such a one
might at one moment be functioning on one plane andthe next on another, but there would be no confusionas to the fact in the mind of the trained observer, forthe sensitive has not the same comprehensive powerof acquiring real knowledge on the astral as whenupon the spiritual plane. When the true Ego, by the
effort or assistance of the mesmerist, is really clearedof close connection with the lower principles, it is stillof course in close magnetic touch with the operator,though it can no longer be accurately spoken of as
under his control, for it has then passed into a condition or state of consciousness which renders it
absolutely free from all influence from this plane.In the mesmerism of the stage, or in the ordinary
drawing-room experiments, it is undoubtedly true thatonly the astral principles are brought into operation.The physical senses are rendered inoperative and theastral ones take their place. To drink noxious liquids,suck tallow candles, or to have the flesh piercedwith pins and needles does not require the interventionof the victim’s Higher Self, and for such performancesthe stronger physically and the more material the
operator probably the greater the anaesthetic results.But where it is a question of the higher regions of theArt, something quite outside of a merely strongphysique is necessary.
The practice of this more spiritual kind ofmesmerism as here discussed, is hardly open to the
ordinary run of people. It requires one who is anOccult student, one who knows something of theconditions and influences that connect humanity withthe unseen universe, continued patience, great self
105
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
denial, and certain other facilities that need not be
here mentioned.Almost the first thing the Occult student of
mesmerism, who is also in search of spiritual truth,sets himself to do, is to try and separate the highertriad of the sensitive’s principles from the lower
quaternary. This he may succeed in doing more orless quickly or slowly according to the possibilities ofthe subject. Let this result once be effected and what
happens is,
that the Ego or Higher Self immediatelytouches that state of consciousness to which itsfreedom from the lower quaternary entitles it
, viz.,that of the spiritual plane. ]ust as in the case ofdeath, whether the complete separation of the three
higher principles from the lower ones takes a longeror shorter period, when the liberation has taken placethen the Ego’s consciousness enters upon its Devanchic bliss. But while that separation is not com
plete, whether the body is dead or only entranced,while the Higher Manas is too much held back by theclaims of the lower, the Ego is unable to touch thestate of consciousness beyond that of the Astral plane,but even in that condition it is the true Ego that iscommunicating with the magnetizer, and there is no
question of a skilled and experienced student mistaking the independent intelligence of the Higher Selffor the utterances of the lower astral principles moreor less reflecting his own thoughts.
There are undoubtedly certain centres of vital and
magnetic force in the human body. These are of the
greatest importance as connecting the physical bodywith the astral. The potentialities of these in their fullsignificance are known only to those who have passedcertain initiations and cannot be explained. It is muchbetter therefore that they should not be mentioned atall in books intended for the public at large, and for
106
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
the reason that there are already suflicient dangers inthe widespread use of mesmerism and hypnotismamong curious and unscrupulous experimenters,without starting these on new lines of research, the
further possibilities of which, if only partially discovered, would render mesmerism a hundred timesmore insidious and dangerous to the sensitives thanis at present the case.”
PATIENCE SINNETT.
107
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
CHAPTER XI.
deal with her approach to Theosophy and herrelations with Madame Blavatsky. She never
knew our “ O.L.” during any of the stormy periodsof her life, only making her acquaintance in 1889when she was comfortably established in LansdowneRoad and surrounded with devotees. Under these
calm conditions and naturally eager to enlist Mrs.Besant in the great Theosophical cause, which she
was always ready to serve, according to her lightseven by means that “western morality ” which she
openly despised would condemn, she evidently tookcare to keep her loftiest characteristics well inevidence. To Mrs. Besant, for the brief remainder ofher life, she was always entitled to “the reverencedue from a pupil to a teacher who never failed her ”
and to “ the passionate gratitude which, in ourschool, is the natural meed of the one who opens the
gateway and points out the path.”* No doubtMadame Blavatsky realised the importance of Mrs.Besant as a recruit for the Theosophical Society anddid all she could to confirm her attachment to it.
Though for many years at this period “phenomena”
were scornfully denounced by the “ O.L.” herself andher later followers, as unworthy of association withthe dignified ethics of pure Theosophy, their potentagency seems to have been invoked to rivet Mrs.Besant’s devotion to her revered teacher. She writes :
“I had asked her as to the agency at work in producing the taps so constantly heard at Spiritualistic
* “Annie Besant: an Autobiography," p 344
INMrs. Besant’s Autobiography the last few pages
108
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
seances.‘ You don’t use spirits to produce taps’ she
said: ‘ See here! ’ She put her hand over my head,
not touching it,
and I heard and felt slight taps onthe bone of my skull, each sending a little electricthrill down the spine. She then carefully explainedhow such taps were produced at any point desired bythe operator and how interplay of the currents to
which they were due, might be caused otherwise than
by conscious human volition. It was in this fashionthat she would illustrate her verbal teachings, provingby experiments the statements made as to the existence of subtle forces controllable by the trainedmind.”*
Mrs. Besant takes care to add: “ The proof of the
reality of her mission from those whom she spoke ofas Masters lay not in these comparatively trivialphysical and mental phenomena, but in the splendourof her heroic endurance, the depths of her knowledge,the selflessness of her character, the lofty spiritualityof her teaching, the untiring passion of her devotion,the incessant ardour of her work for the enlighteningof men.”**
The view of her that some of us derive fromexperience of the “Early Days ” renders some partof this glowing eulogy almost more amusing thanimpressive, but though my plain narrative of actualhappenings may sometimes cast light on the less
alluring aspects of Madame Blavatsky’s very variedcharacter, I can easily understand how, with them
entirely in suppression, and a strong motive inoperation, she gave rise to the impressions in Mrs.Besant’s mind set forth in the glowing languageabove quoted. Her character would not have been“ varied ” as I have described it
, if it had not includedsome very fine aspects—as well as the others.
* IBID, p 353“* I31D, p 354
109
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
During the period of Mrs. Besant’s residence withher—the last two years of her life—neither my wifenor I saw anything of her. We were in close touchwith the Master K. H. himself by our own privatearrangements and, as I have already explained, wereemphatically warned by him to guard them from anypossible interference by Madame Blavatsky. So theresult of it was a complete extinction of our formerintimate relations. I have never known exactly whatstrange tales she invented in order to keep Mrs.Besant from making acquaintance with us, as shemight naturally have wished to do when becomingattached to the theosophical movement. In her autobiography she describes how long before becomingacquainted with Madame Blavatsky and when investigating occult ideas of all kinds—“ Into the darkness shot a ray of light A. P. Sinnett’s ‘OccultWorld ’ with its wonderfully suggestive letters.”When the illumination had expanded and Occultismin its loftiest aspects became the main purpose ofMrs. Besant’s life it must have required some inventive ingenuity on Madame Blavatsky’s part to restrainher from coming into touch with us. But theingenuity was effective, and it was only after MadameBlavatsky’s death, only after Mrs. Besant had goneto India, had been in touch with the Master Moryaon her own account and had come back to Londonthat the mysterious barrier set up between us was\broken down. In a manner as touching to me as itwas simple and straightforward Mrs. Besant told me
that she had misjudged me altogether at first and was
sorry for it. We became good friends at once andI have never striven to penetrate the mystery whichlay in the background.
In 1890 Madame Blavatsky moved from the Lansdowne Road to 19, Avenue Road, St. ]ohn’s Wood,
IIO
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
a house over which Mrs. Besant had control, and
there she died in May, 1891. A little later on Mrs.Besant paid her first visit to India, and on her return
established friendly relations with ourselves in the
manner I have already described. \/Ve were then in
the middle of the period during which our privatemethods of communicating with the Master K. H.were in full progress, and it was no longer necessaryto maintain the secrecy that had at first been used to
shield them from Madame Blavatsky’s jealousy. Mrs.Besant quickly appreciated their importance, and
applied for admission to the London Lodge, whichwe cordially welcomed. Of course she at once beganto take part in the work of the inner group whichwithout any formal organization as such, or affecta
tion of masonic ceremonial, became the real vortex of
the theosophic teaching of the period. The longseries of London Lodge Transactions which were dueto that teaching constitute, as we look back uponthem, so many mile-stones on the road leadinggradually to the later developments of theosophicalknowledge.
When Mrs. Besant joined our group she became
intimately acquainted for the first time with Mr.Leadbeater, whose wonderful clairvoyant facultieswere of immense assistance to us in our studies. Upto that time he had been exclusively devoted to
co-operation with us. I had, as I have alreadymentioned, procured him remunerative employmentin the London Office of the “ Pioneer,” but event
ually, as Mrs. Besant came to appreciate his valueshe became desirous of enlisting him on the
theosophical staff at Avenue Road. She was surrounded there with a group of young men identifiedwith the Blavatsky Lodge, some of whom were welloff, in possession of plentiful means. An offer was
III
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
made to Mr. Leadbeater to the effect that if he wouldgive up his “ Pioneer ” work, come and live at theAvenue Road house, and devote himself to assistingthe group there in their studies, he should be providedwith an adequate income—I forget what was the
precise amount to be guaranteed to him. To do himonly justice I should say that his answer at first wasthat he would leave the decision to me, and if I hadrefused to sanction the arrangement I believe he
would loyally have accepted that decision. But I feltthat I could only give one answer. I was sure thathe would prefer the Avenue Road plan beyond alloomparison with the other course of life, and Iagreed. I knew that the change would mean a greatloss to us of the London Lodge but that had to be
borne. The first idea was that Mr. Leadbeater wouldstill be able to attend our group meetings, butnaturally that interest for him slackened as time wenton. I cannot find the exact date of the change but itoccurred somewhere in the 189o’s.
During those years our activities at LeinsterGardens were very energetic. I find their records inmy wife’s Diary very interesting. We continuallyheld meetings of the London Lodge to which friendsof the members came in large numbers, the attendancemounting up sometimes to as many as sixty, and the
weekly group meetings were going on all the time.These sometimes seemed to have been kept up tillvery late hours. At some evening meetings Mrs.Besant lectured, more often that duty fell to me. Thediffusion of interest in Theosophy as a consequenceof these proceedings must have been very important,and this is partly evidenced by the record of ourregular weekly afternoon receptions. The Diarygenerally records the names of Tuesday visitors, ormany of them, and the lists are significant of the
II2
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
wide-spread interest in our work felt in various strataof London society.
This was all going on in spite of the fact thatfinancial ruin had overwhelmed us. This is not anautobiography so I need not go into detail, but ourruin owing to the failure of certain companies inwhich during the previous nine or ten years of their
great prosperity I had become deeply involved was
very complete, obliging me to work harder than ever
and to accept help from some sympathetic friends.The whole course of events as I have since learned
lay outside the normal Karma of our lives. All wasarranged by the black powers with the idea that weshould be so angry with our own Masters for notwarding off the catastrophe that we should throw upall theosophical work in disgust. Though wesuffered very severely we remained faithful to the
theosophical cause, thus what was intended to be
spiritual disaster for us proved an ordeal successfullypassed, and productive of great spiritual advancement.
In spite of financial embarrassment we continuedto keep on living at Leinster Gardens for some yearsand the lodge meetings and group meetings were heldthere, but eventually in 1905 were obliged to moveinto a smaller and cheaper house, in a less desirableneighbourhood, 14, Westbourne Terrace Road.None the less our theosophical friends found theirway there, and we continued our Tuesday afternoonreceptions.
Serious troubles began soon afterwards to affect
the Society. They cannot be regarded as belongingto the “ Early Days,” so it will be only necessary forme to sketch their course very lightly. For some
years Mr. Leadbeater had been travelling and lecturing in America and Australia. From America painful stories reached this country to the effect that he
113H
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
had been guilty of serious misconduct with boysentrusted to him as pupils. The accusations pointedespecially to instruction he gave them more or less
secretly in practice designed to quench their desirefor sexual intercourse of the ordinary kind. Thoseinclined to take the worst view of their significanceimagined that they pointed to still more shockingoffences. Colonel Olcott, then in Paris, came over toLondon to investigate the charges and called a meet
ing of representative theosophists to advise him as tothe course to be pursued. Mr. Leadbeater himself waspresent, not denying that he had given the instructionabove referred to to the boys in question, but treatingthe other insinuation with scornful contempt. Theproceedings were of a painful character and some ofthe members present contended eagerly that Mr.Leadbeater should be expelled from the Society. Hehad already offered his resignation to Colonel Olcottand I moved that it should be accepted. On a divisionthe advocates of expulsion were defeated and myadvice carried. Mr. Leadbeater retired after this intoobscurity and only a few of his personal friends knewof his address; so the storm, for the moment, quieteddown.
Its most serious consequences, as far as the Societywas concerned, developed later. Colonel Olcott diedat Adyar, Madras, in the year 1907. The clairvoyanttestimony of one lady staying at Adyar at the timeindicated that some of the Masters had been presentin astral body when the fatal result of Colonel Olcott’sillness approached. The details of the story whichgot afloat were believed or discredited in the Societyaccording to the various attitudes of mind which theyencountered. It was alleged that the Masters hadplainly declared that Mrs. Besant should be the nextPresident. Some rather embarrassing functions in
114
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
the meanwhile devolved upon myself. By the rules
of the Society where a President should die or resign,
the authority of the Presidency pending the election
of a new President, was to be exercised by the VicePresident. I was holding that office at the time of
Colonel Olcott’s death, but I was living in London,and all the machinery of the Society’s administrationwas focussed on Adyar. Current expenditure even
required Presidential authority. It was obvious thatI had to delegate my suddenly acquired power to
someone at Adyar. Various cable messages weresent back and forward and it seemed that either Mrs.Besant or Mr. Bertram Keightley, then on the spot,might be selected. They, however, I understood tobe very much at variance and I had no means of
forming an independent opinion as to the merits ofthe situation, so I appointed the Treasurer of the
Society, a man who appeared to be neutral betweenthe more or less antagonistic groups and generallyrespected, as my Deputy. In the course of timeMrs. Besant was duly elected, and the excitements ofthe period I have been dealing with were soonforgotten, though the Leadbeater scandal wasdestined to a formidable revival before long.
In November, 1908, I was subject to a terrible misfortune, the loss of my wife who died on the 9thof that month after a long and fearfully painful illnessdue to cancer. For the benefit of theosophical readerswho may not unnaturally regard such an end to sucha life with surprise approaching bewilderment I thinkit well to explain what I have learned since, that hersevere sufferings were not Karmic in any way, nor, inthis case, the result of any attack by Satanic enemies.By her own decision on the higher plane, though notconscious of this in the incarnate self, she chose thefrightfully distressing conditions of her departure
115
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
from this life—-for which the natural period had ar
rived—in order to accomplish a great spiritual purpose. To explain this more fully would necessitate an
elaborate survey of occult mysteries with which it is
not the purpose of this book to deal. Nor is it neces
sary for me to dwell on the effect the loss had on
myself for a time, till in the later progress of my owndevelopment I came to understand the whole situationaright, to comprehend the sublime conditions in the
Occult World to which my wife attained partly inconsequence of her great sacrifice, to enjoy opportunities of communication with her and to realise thewisdom underlying the course she had pursued.
Mrs. Besant soon after her election as President sawreason to modify her first impression concerning Mr.Leadbeater and arranged for his return to Adyar andhis resumption of his work as a leading member ofthe Society. This gave rise to much excited feelingin the Society and especially in the London Lodge.At a meeting of the Lodge held in February, 1909,
the Lodge by a practically unanimous vote detacheditself from the Society altogether. I was not myselfentirely in sympathy with the course, but in view ofthe strong feeling of the Lodge generally, it wasuseless to attempt any opposition to the separationproposal. It seemed absurd that I should disconnectmyself from the Society which I had been mainly instrumental in establishing—so far as the westernworld was concerned—but at all events, by agreementto the separation it seemed possible to keep the London Lodge together and make a new departure intouch with Theosophy if not with the TheosophicalSociety. So a Committee was appointed to carry outthe idea and the members of the former London Lodgebecame, almost all, members of a new body to whichwe gave a new name—“The Eleusinian Society."
116
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Under this designation we used to meet, for about two
years, at the rooms of the Royal Asiatic Society in
Albemarle Street. I remained all the time in touch
with the Masters, through a very efficient channel of
communication, and a time came when I was enabled
to see that the anomalous arrangement prevailingmight as well come to an end. I determined to re
sume my connexion with the regular TheosophicalSociety. I was re-established in my former positionas Vice-President and I endeavoured to persuade the
Eleusinian Society to resume its old character as the
London Lodge of the T.S. Some agreed and othersrefused. The London Lodge was re-constituted undera special Charter issued by.the governing body at
Adyar and by degrees the whole Eleusinian episodehas been almost forgotten, except as regards some
broken friendships of the earlier period that are a sad
memento for me of the great crisis of 1906.
So, writing now in the course of the eightieth yearof my life on this physical plane, I feel that it is need
less to attempt to carry the record any further. Theobject I have had in view has been to leave behindme for the benefit of future theosophical generations a
plain, truthful narrative of the circumstances underwhich the great movement was inaugurated in theWestern world, in order to correct, as far as need be,
mythological conceptions of those Early Days whichare apt to arise in later days among new adherents ofthe movement who have no personal knowledge ofthe human agency employed in the beginning by thereal Founders of the theosophical movement whowork on super-physical planes of activity. The blundering of human agency has over and over againthreatened to wreck the whole undertaking. Few of usconcerned with its beginning have avoided mistakesaltogether, but in bringing to a close this sketchy
117
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
review of mistakes and successes, the story will intro
duce the reader to one person at all events quite un
known to the theosophical world at large whose im
portant share in the early work seems to me, lookingback, unblemished by mistake—my Wife. The storyI have had to tell will show how we together—my wifeand I—had the privilege of launching the theosophicalmovement in Europe, for nothing done before 1883
bore any promise of permanent vitality. I—and perhaps hardly anyone else still living—can appreciatethe value of her influence while our house was thecentre around which all theosophical activities of the
period revolved. And that influence was so effective,
as I seem to see now, because it was untainted by thefaintest desire for recognition. There was no selfregarding germ in my wife’s nature on which evilinfluences could play to bring about misdirectedaction, while if there were germs of the right kind inpeople with whom she might be dealing, these were
nourished or brought out by her influence in a re
markable manner, as I have learned to understand inthese later years since she has passed on. As anunderlying attribute which conduced to the results Irefer to, she was the most absolutely truthful person Ihave ever known, incapable of deception in any form,and that is an attribute which is impressive to othersin a greater degree than perhaps they always understand.
118
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
~ERRATA.
Owing to 9n error in p9gin9tion, the figure: in the Indcx
should be re9d ss 2 short of those given, 41, :.g., in
the Index 9s p9ge 39.
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
,__
‘": : '---' mj“ ;
l
.¥
fl
l
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
INDEX.
Adyar Headquarters bought ..
Allahabad, Sinnetts at .
,, Founders’ visit to
,, ,, second visit to . .
Arundale, Miss Francesca,, ,, ,, temporary misunderstanding,, ,,
‘,, under H.P.B.’s influence
Arya Samaj, The,, ,, Early Association with T.S.
Autobiogragfihy of Mn‘. Besant quoted
Besant, Mrs., and Mars and Mercury dispute,, ’s friendship with the Sinnetts
,, ’s nomination to presidency,, joins the London Lodge,, meets Mr. Leadbeater
!:
!!
:!
!!
:: ,, invites Mr. Leadbeater to rejoin T.S..Billing, Dr. H. ].Blake, Dr. CarterBlavatsky, H. P., anger with Col. Olcott
!!
H
!!
:!
!!
!!
!!
:!
!!
!!
!!
!!
arrives in Londonarrives unexpectedly at L.L.as “founder” of the T.S.aspects of character
attitude to spiritualismat Lansdowne Road
Page.41 '3‘?23 ;''l24 L1'.31 11-”;
43
60
64
ll12
110,111
96
112
ll6ll3113
ll813
13
62
89
58
9
lll30
92
119
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Blavatsky, H. P., at Naples, 1885 81
,, ,, clairvoyant testimony in favour of 80
,, ,, climax of success, 1884 64
,, ,, death in 1891 113
,, ,, defects as an agent 22
,, ,, enemies desire to cross.examine 80
,, ,, final breach with Sinnetts 89
,, ,, founds E.S. and why 91
,, ,, further study of character . 73
,, ,, goes to Wurzburg 85
,, ,, her temper 28
,, ,, interferes with visit to Elberfeld 74
,, ,, in Tibet 20
,, ,, leaves Adyar . 46
,, ,, ’s letter from Torre del Greco 81—3,, ,, ’s letter about Incident: . 86
,, ,, ’s letter to Olcott 92
,, ,, ’s magic . 26
,, ,, moves to Ostende .. .... .. 88
,, ,, moves to Avenue Road . 112
,, ,, occasional trickery by . 71
,, ,, pen portrait of . 69
,, ,, psychic powers of . 20
,, ,, a psychological puzzle 70—l,, ,, resolves to prosecute Coulombs 79
,, ,, returns to India 78
,, ,, returns to Europe with doctor 80
,, ,, visits Mr. Hume 36
,, ,, writes for Russian papers . l6
Blavatsky Lodge suggested 90
British Branch of T.S. founded ll,, ,, ,, in Great Russel Street 31
,, ,, ,, Rules of the l2
British Section of the T.S. constituted 99
Brothers, The 9
,, ,, their letters begin .. 29
,, ,, Mrs. Kingsford’s attitude to 51
Brotherhood term first used... 12
,, nucleus of universal . . 20
"Buddha on Wheels," the ,. 61
Pa ge.
I20
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Page.
Chafi in the press 50“ Chohan, the Old” 38
Cobb, ]. Storer . 13
Collins, Mabel (Mrs. K. Cook) 48
Conversazione at Prince’s Hall . 50
Coulombs, the . . 67
,, commence action against General Morgan 80
Death of H.P.B. in 1891 . 113
,, Col. Olcott . . 116
,, Mrs. Sinnett .. . . 117
Despatch case missing '. . . 76
Diary of Mrs. Sinnett 34-—-5
Difficulties arising on Olcott’s death .. . 117
Difiiculties of study with H.P.B. .. . 36
Dramard incident in Paris 91
“ Early days ” end in 1887 90
Elberfeld visited . 45
Eleusinian Society founded . 118
Exoteric Buddhism referred to ... 29,35,, . ,, commenced . . . . 41
,, ,, published 44
,, ,, writing of .. . . 39
Esoteric Section formed, and why 91
,, ,, pledge in the .. .. 93
Fadeef, Mme. 85
Felt, Mr. 10
Finch, Mr. .. 54
,, elected president L.L. .. 57
Five Years of Theosophy .. 52
“Founders,” the, arrive in Bombay 23
,, ,, leave New York .. 11
,, ,, purity of motives of 15
,, ,, quarrels of .. . . 91
,, ,, visits to London 14, 46
,, ,, visits to Sinnetts . . 24, 28
I21
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Page.Gebhard, Mrs., appears 32
,, ,, oontretemps about visit to 74 el reg,, ,, helps H..P.B. to Ostende 88
,, ,, Sinnetts visit to... 44
German T.S. founded 77
I-Iaweis Rev. H. R. 34
Hermetic Society, the 53
'-_». Higher Self, the, controversy about term 99 at regHilarion, Master 48
Hodgson, Richard, of the S.P.R. 66, 67
Holloway, Mr‘s,, clairvoyant pupil of K.H. .. 60
,, ,, cause of quarrel with H.P.B. 63
Hood, H. ]. 21,31
Hiibbe.Schleiden, Dr. .... .. 77
Hume, A. O. 27
,, ,, co-operates in T.S. 30
,, , friction with H.P.B. 37
/ ,, ,, withdraws ..= . 39
Idyl af the White Lotus, genesis of the . 49
Inddenlr in the Life of Mme. Blavaisky 28
,, ,, ,, becomes cause 'of trouble... 87
,, ,, ,, difficulties withdates in 86
Initiatory ceremony in the T.S. 31, 32
Intuition of Mrs. Sinnett . 23
Irix Unveiled 11
,, ,, how written ..' . 20
,, ,, attracts Mr. Sinnett 23
]elihovsky, Mme. 83
jinarajadasa appears .. 96 el reg
Karma. .. llKeightleys, the . . 59
,, ’s, the, group 90
I22
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Kingsford, Dr.
Kislingbury, Miss
!!
!!
:!
H
!!
Anna
:!
!!
as
H
attacks Esoteric Buddhismpresident London T.S....suggests London Lodge
’s letter to London Lodgeand The Pzrfecl Way
“ Koot Hoomi" communications
Ladbroke GardensLeadbeater, C. W., accompanies H.P.B. to India
!!
H
:!
H
!’
u
n
!!
H
!!
!!
acts as tutorelected to T,S.employed on Pianeergoes to Avenue Roadreturns to Europeserious charges against ..
Letter lo members of the London Lodge, A.Letters from “ K.H.” not genuine ..
Levi, Eliphas, referred to
Light on the Path, genesis ofJ,
London Lodge, the, and Dr. A. Kingsford!!
as
!!
!!
,, and Mr. Finch ..
oflices in York Street
Page.43
45
43
44
55
53
13
95
49
78
97
46
98
1 14
96
1 16
55
63
44
48
57
44
84
presents effects to British Section 99
,, ,, reconstituted .... .. 119
,, ,, splits from T.S, in 1908 .. 118
,, ,, troubles in the 84
London Lodge Transaclion, A. .. 99
Lurifer, quoted 96
Maitland, Edward 43
Mars and Mercury Cont-roversy, the 94 at seq.
Massey, C. C. 11,21,31,43
,, ,, resigns from T,S. . 72
Masters, The . 10
,, ,, communications with 29, 30
Master “ K.H.” .. 30, 63, 95
,, ,, ’s letter 94
,, ,, private communication with .. 99
123
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Master Hilarion .
!!
Materialism..Meetings at Queen Anne’s Mansions... .
Mohini...
!!
,, troubles about
Myers, Frederick,, ,, questions on Eroterie Buddhism
gives evidence to S.P.R....
Morya .
Newspaper attacks
Norwood, H.P.B. at
Oreult World, The 28,29,31,35,68,69,112Occult World phenomena and S.P.R. 68
Olcott, H. S.,
!!
!!
!!
H
!!
S!
!!
Old Diary Leave: quoted 9, 12, 28, 66, 78, 79, 80, 83, 90, 91, 92
!!
!!
H
!!
!!
!!
!!
Page.
48
39
10
84
56
65
84, 88
43
50
88
90
as “founder” 9
arrives in London 56
causes first rift with S.P.R. 60
death bed appearances 116
former lives of 16
gives evidence to S.P.R.... 65
presides over Committee of Inquiry... 116
visits to London Branch... 13, 98
Pelly, Sir Lewis .. .
Phenomenon, A. . .. . .
Pioneer, ThePortrait of “ K.H.” phenomenally obtained
Principles—declaration of T.S.Psychic Research Society, the ..
!!
!!
!!
H
!!
H
!!
H
!!
H
!!
!!
!!
H
n
!!
:!
!!
appoints a Committee
famous report appears...
first rift with T.S.friendly attitude at firstmeeting in May, 1885
sends Hodgson to IndiaPsychic Research Society: Proeeetding: quoted...
34
42
23, 39, 98
39—40
14—15
47
65
67
60
52
67
66
65
124
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Page.
Raps, How produced . 26,110,111
Rationale of Mesmzrism, The .... .. 100
Reincarnation . .. 11
Report of the S.P.R.... 67
Review of the position raised by Report... . 68, 73
Row in the London Lodge, T,S. 53
Sarasvati, Swami D. 11
Setret Dodrine, The, announced 58
,, ,, ,, being written .. 88
,, ,, ,, published 1888 94
Shrine at Adyar, the .. 46,67
Sidgewick, Professor . 43
Simla visited by “ Founders” 28
Sinnetts, the, leave for London 31
,, ,, decline to join E.S. . 93
,, Mr., first lecture . 34
,, financial ruin 115
,, ,, move to Leinster Gardens... 99
,, ,, ,, Westbourne Terrace Road 115
,, ,, return to London, 1883 .. 43
,, Mr., withdraws from Pioneer 40
,, Mr., temporary Presidential duty 117
Sinnett, Mrs. 23
,, ,, ‘sable defence of term “Higher Self ”100
,, ,, dies in 1908... ...114,, ,, ’sdiary quoted ...26,34,84,
Society for Psychic Research (S.P.R.)See under Psychic Research Society.
Soloviofi, M., at Wurzburg 85
, 24, 120
at seq.
88, 114
Subba Rao .. 51
,, ,, and London Lodge Letter .. . 55
Superphysical beginnings of T.S. 9, 21, at reg.
Tennant, Mrs. .. . . 44
Theosophical Movement, an experiment . 11
,, ,, real purpose of the.. . . 15
125
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
Theosophical Society and Arya Samaj
!!
!!
:!
n
!!
H
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
Theorophist, The“ Those damned Memoirs” !
Tribute to Mrs. Sinnett
Vdhan, The, quoted.
as a Secret Society?Early troubles infoundedmain object of the...
progress of the..
serious troubles in the
. -
Wachtmeister, Countess...,, ’s Care of H.P.B. .. .
Ward, Mr. Sam.
White Lodge, TheWyld, Dr. George
Page.11
31
45, 54 et seq.
10
19
91
115
39
88
120
17 et seq.
59
ss44
21, 22, as, 16
13
Printed by The Star and Gazette Co., Lid., Guernrey.
Genera
ted f
or
John P
atr
ick
Deveney (
Univ
ers
ity o
f C
hic
ag
o)
on 2
01
5-0
6-0
5 1
1:4
4 G
MT /
htt
p:/
/hdl.handle
.net/
20
27
/uc1
.31
82
20
35
06
03
42
Public
Dom
ain
, G
oog
le-d
igit
ized
/
htt
p:/
/ww
w.h
ath
itru
st.o
rg/a
ccess
_use
#pd-g
oogle
